1 CRA No.1006/2025 2025:CGHC:54812-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1006 of 2025 Ramdulare Chouhan S/o Algu Chouhan Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Chhota Narkahwa, P.S. Hanuman Ganj, District Kushinagar (Uttar Pradesh), At Present R/o Dabra Para, Veer Shivaji Nagar, P.S. Aamanaka, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Aamanaka, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Appellant : Ms. Anjali Pradhan, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Judgment on Board Per Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge 11.11.2025 This criminal appeal filed by the appellant under Section 415(2) of the BNSS, 2023 is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 01/05/2025, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, First Fast Track Special Court POCSO, Raipur (C.G.) in Special Criminal Case POCSO No.159/2022, AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2025.11.13 14:53:27 +0530 2 CRA No.1006/2025 whereby the appellant/accused has been convicted for the offence and sentenced as under:- Conviction Sentence Under Section 376(3) of the IPC R.I. for 20 years and fine of Rs.1000/-, with default stipulation Under Section 506 Part-II of the IPC R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs.1000/-, with default stipulation Under Section 4(2) of POCSO Act R.I. for 20 years and fine of Rs.1000/- with default stipulation Under Section 6 of POCSO Act R.I. for 20 years and fine of Rs.1000/- with default stipulation All the sentences were directed to run concurrently 1. Facts of the case, in brief, is that on 25.05.2022, the complainant/victim (PW-1) lodged a written complaint at the Amanaka police station, alleging that about a year ago, the accused, who was living nearby on rent, had consensual relations with her after expressing his love. However, he later started forcing her to have physical relations with him repeatedly, threatening to harm her and her parents if she refused. The accused allegedly took the victim to a deserted area near the Mohaba Bazar Overbridge railway line and forced her to have physical relations. The victim claimed that the accused continued to harass her, and when she went to her village, he would call her and threaten to share her video to her relatives if she object to make physical relation with him. Subsequently, the victim 3 CRA No.1006/2025 narrated the incident to her parents and on the basis of written complaint, an FIR vide Ex.P-2 was registered against the appellant. During investigation, spot map was prepared vide Ex.P-3. Medical Examination of victim was conducted. To ascertain the age of victim, Dakhil-kharij register was seized vide Ex.P-18/C. Statement of victim was recorded. Appellant was arrested vide Ex.P-23 After completing of investigation, final report was prepared. 2. The trial court has framed charges against the appellant for the aforementioned offence and the appellant abjured his guilt and pleaded innocence. 3. In order to establish the charge against the appellant, the prosecution examined as many as 8 witnesses and exhibited 36 documents. The statement of the appellant under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was also recorded in which they denied the material appearing against him and stated that he is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the case. After appreciation of evidence available on record, the learned trial Court has convicted the accused/appellant and sentenced him as mentioned in para 1 of the judgment. Hence, this appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the trial Court has not properly appreciated the overall evidence available on record for holding the appellant guilty. She further submits that the incident took place between 01/11/2020 to 01/10/2021 and the 4 CRA No.1006/2025 FIR was registered on 25/05/2022, hence, there is a delay in lodging the FIR. Learned counsel submits that the mother of victim has admitted that the police complaint was filed only after a quarrel took place between the appellant and her family members and thereafter, she turned hostile, but the learned trial Court has not considered the statement of mother of victim. In this case, FSL report is negative and there is no specific opinion given by the Doctor regarding sexual intercourse, who conducted the medical examination of victim. She also submits that the prosecution has not been able to prove the exact age of the victim below 18 years and that she was minor on the date of incident. The learned trial Court erred in convicting the appellant only on the basis of assumption and presumption and the finding given by the learned trial Court against the appellant is perverse and contrary to evidence on record. As such, the criminal appeal deserves to be allowed and the impugned judgment deserves to be set aside. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant and submits that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt the learned trial Court after considering the material available on record has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant, in which no interference is called for. 5 CRA No.1006/2025 6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 7. The first question arises for consideration in the present appeal is whether the age of victim was below 18 years at the time of incident. 8. Headmistress (PW-4) of the school where the victim was studying, in her statement, stated that in the dakhil-kharij register, the names of the victim and her parents are mentioned at Sr. No.136 and also the date of birth of the victim is mentioned as 01/01/2007. Seizure memo of dakhil kharij register is Ex.P-18/C. Accordingly, in view of the evidence of Headmistress (PW-4) of the school where the victim was studying and also on the basis of Dakhil Kharij register, it is proved that the age of victim at the time of incident was about 14 years, which is less than 18 years. 9. PW-2, mother of victim stated in her evidence that at the time of incident, the age of victim was 13-14 years. She further stated that the Birth Certificate of the victim was given at Police Station in her presence, which is vide seizure memo Ex.P-6. 10.Victim herself stated in her evidence that she has given birth certificate at police station, and the seizure memo is Ex.P-6. 11. Rana Singh Thakur PW-7, Investigating Officer stated in his evidence that the victim has given her birth certificate at police 6 CRA No.1006/2025 station, which is seized vide seizure memo Ex.P-6. After taking her birth certificate, photocopy of the same has been annexed. 12.In para 32 and 33 of the judgment of trial Court, it is observed that the statement of the Investigating Officer makes it clear that, while performing his duty, he seized the victim’s birth certificate and prepared a seizure memo marked as Exhibit P-6. This seizure memo has been supported by the victim and her mother. The authenticity of this document has not been challenged during cross-examination. 13.Upon examining the seizure memo (Exhibit P-6) which contains photocopy of the birth certificate, it appears that the birth certificate records the date of birth of victim as 01.01.2007. The date of birth 01.01.2007, as stated by the victim’s mother, is corroborated by the school dakhil register vide Ex.P-18/C), where the same date of birth is recorded. According to the prosecution’s case, the incident occurred between 01.11.2020 and 01.10.2021. Thus, at the time of the incident, the victim’s age was between 13 and 14 years. 14. Now, the second question which arises for consideration is, what are the circumstances which shows that the victim was raped by the appellant/accused. 15. PW-1 Victim stated in her evidence that she knows the appellant and he was residing on rented house near her house. The accused sexually assaulted her. She deposed that the accused would call her to meet him near the railway tracks and have made 7 CRA No.1006/2025 physical relation with her. The accused/appellant committed sexual intercourse with her many times. When victim refused to meet him, the accused threaten her, saying, "If she would not come to meet him, she would either kill her parents or kill her.” The accused repeatedly called her to meet, which made her distressed and she went to her grandmother's house/village in Baloda Bazar. When she didn't call him after left the village, the appellant used to call her late night and harass her. When she answered the phone of accused and told him that she does not want to talk, then, he threatened to kill her parents. Thereafter, she spoke with him for a week, after which he made her photo viral, to which, her family came to know about the incident and subsequently, complaint was lodged by her. 16. PW-2, mother of victim stated in her evidence that her daughter hadn't previously told her anything about the incident. When the accused came to her cart/shop and started a fight, her daughter told her about the incident, saying that he had taken her across the tracks and forcibly committed sexual intercourse with her and also threatened her. 17. According to the medical examination report which was conducted by Doctor PW-3, the victim's hymen was torn and healed at 5 o'clock. There was discharge on the victim's genitals. 18. The Supreme Court in the matter of Rai Sandeep alias Deenu v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2012 (8) SCC 21 held as under:- 8 CRA No.1006/2025 “22. In our considered opinion, the ‘sterling witness’ should be of a very high quality and caliber whose version should, therefore, be unassailable. The Court considering the version of such witness should be in a position to accept it for its face value without any hesitation. To test the quality of such a witness, the status of the witness would be immaterial and what would be relevant is the truthfulness of the statement made by such a witness. What would be more relevant would be the consistency of the statement right from the starting point till the end, namely, at the time when the witness makes the initial statement and ultimately before the Court. It should be natural and consistent with the case of the prosecution qua the accused. There should not be any prevarication in the version of such a witness. The witness should be in a position to withstand the cross-examination of any length and howsoever strenuous it may be and under no circumstance should give room for any doubt as to the factum of the occurrence, the persons involved, as well as, the sequence of it. Such a version should have co- relation with each and everyone of other supporting material such as the recoveries made, the weapons used, the manner of offence committed, the scientific evidence and the expert opinion. The said version should consistently match with the version of every other witness. It can even be stated that it should be akin to the test applied in the case of circumstantial evidence where there should not be any missing link in the chain of circumstances to hold the accused guilty of the offence alleged against him. Only if the version of such a witness qualifies the above test as well as all other similar such tests to be applied, it can be held 9 CRA No.1006/2025 that such a witness can be called as a ‘sterling witness’ whose version can be accepted by the Court without any corroboration and based on which the guilty can be punished. To be more recise, the version of the said witness on the core spectrum of the crime should remain intact while all other attendant materials, namely, oral, documentary and material objects should match the said version in material particulars in order to enable the Court trying the offence to rely on the core version to sieve the other supporting materials for holding the offender guilty of the charge alleged.” 19. Also, the Supreme Court in the matter of State of Maharashtra vs Chandraprakash Kewal Chand Jain, 1990 SCC 550 held as under:- “A prosecutrix of a sex-offence cannot be put on par with an accomplice. She is in fact a victim of the crime. The Evidence Act nowhere says that her evidence cannot be accepted unless it is corroborated in material particulars. She is undoubtedly a competent witness under Section 118 and her evidence must receive the same weight as is attached to an injured in cases of physical violence. The same degree of care and caution must attach in the evaluation of her evidence as in the case of an injured complainant or witness and no more. What is necessary is that the Court must be conscious of the fact that it is dealing with the evidence of a person who is interested in the outcome of the charge levelled by her. If the Court keeps this in mind and feels satisfied that it can act on the evidence of the prosecutrix. There is no rule of law or practice 10 CRA No.1006/2025 incorporated in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (in short ‘Evidence Act’) similar to illustration (b) to Section 114 which requires it to look for corroboration. If for some reason the Court is hesitant to place implicit reliance on the testimony of the prosecutrix it may look for evidence which may lend assurance to her testimony short of corroboration required in the case of an accomplice. The nature of evidence required to lend assurance to the testimony of the prosecutrix must necessarily depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. But if a prosecutrix is an adult and of full understanding the Court is entitled to base a conviction on her evidence unless the same is own to be infirm and not trustworthy. If the totality of the circumstances appearing on the record of the case discloses that the prosecutrix does not have a strong motive to falsely involve the person charged, the Court should ordinarily have no hesitation in accepting her evidence.” 20. In the matter of Alakh Alok Srivastava v. Union of India & Ors., (2018) 17 SCC 291, in paras 14 and 20, it is observed as under: “14. At the very outset, it has to be stated with authority that the Pocso Act is a gender legislation. This Act has been divided into various chapters and parts therein. Chapter II of the Act titled “Sexual Offences Against Children” is segregated into five parts. Part A of the said Chapter contains two sections, namely, Section 3 and Section 4. Section 3 defines the offence of “Penetrative Sexual Assault” whereas Section 4 lays down the punishment for the said offence. Likewise, Part B of the said Chapter 11 CRA No.1006/2025 titled “Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault and Punishment therefor” contains two sections, namely, Section 5 and Section 6. The various subsections of Section 5 copiously deal with various situations, circumstances and categories of persons where the offence of penetrative sexual assault would take the character of the offence of aggravated penetrative sexual assault. Section 5(k), in particular, while laying emphasis on the mental stability of a child stipulates that where an offender commits penetrative sexual assault on a child, by taking advantage of the child's mental or physical disability, it shall amount to an offence of aggravated penetrative sexual assault.” “20. Speaking about the child, a three Judge Bench in M.C. Mehta v. State of T.N. (1996) 6 SCC 756 “1. … “child is the father of man”. To enable fathering of a valiant and vibrant man, the child must be groomed well in the formative years of his life. He must receive education, acquire knowledge of man and materials and blossom in such an atmosphere that on reaching age, he is found to be a man with a mission, a man who matters so far as the society is concerned.” 21. The Supreme Court in the matter of Nawabuddin v. State of Uttarakhand (CRIMINAL APPEAL No.144 of 2022), decided on 8.2.2022 has held as under:- “10. Keeping in mind the aforesaid objects and to achieve what has been provided under Article 15 and 39 of the Constitution to protect children from the offences of sexual assault, sexual harassment, the POCSO Act, 2012 has been enacted. Any act of sexual assault or sexual harassment to the children 12 CRA No.1006/2025 should be viewed very seriously and all such offences of sexual assault, sexual harassment on the children have to be dealt with in a stringent manner and no leniency should be shown to a person who has committed the offence under the POCSO Act. By awarding a suitable punishment commensurate with the act of sexual assault, sexual harassment, a message must be conveyed to the society at large that, if anybody commits any offence under the POCSO Act of sexual assault, sexual harassment or use of children for pornographic purposes they shall be punished suitably and no leniency shall be shown to them. Cases of sexual assault or sexual harassment on the children are instances of perverse lust for sex where even innocent children are not spared in pursuit of such debased sexual pleasure. Children are precious human resources of our country; they are the country’s future. The hope of tomorrow rests on them. But unfortunately, in our country, a girl child is in a very vulnerable position. There are different modes of her exploitation, including sexual assault and/or sexual abuse. In our view, exploitation of children in such a manner is a crime against humanity and the society. Therefore, the children and more particularly the girl child deserve full protection and need greater care and protection whether in the urban or rural areas. As observed and held by this Court in the case of State of Rajasthan v. Om Prakash, (2002) 5 SCC 745, children need special care and protection and, in such cases, responsibility on the shoulders of the Courts is more onerous so as to provide proper legal protection to these children. In the case of Nipun Saxena v. Union 13 CRA No.1006/2025 of India, (2019) 2 SCC 703, it is observed by this Court that a minor who is subjected to sexual abuse needs to be protected even more than a major victim because a major victim being an adult may still be able to withstand the social ostracization and mental harassment meted out by society, but a minor victim will find it difficult to do so. Most crimes against minor victims are not even reported as very often, the perpetrator of the crime is a member of the family of the victim or a close friend. Therefore, the child needs extra protection. Therefore, no leniency can be shown to an accused who has committed the offences under the POCSO Act, 2012 and particularly when the same is proved by adequate evidence before a court of law.” 22. The Supreme court in the matter of State of UP v. Sonu Kushwaha, (2023) 7 SCC 475 has held as under : “12. The POCSO Act was enacted to provide more stringent punishments for the offences of child abuse of various kinds and that is why minimum punishments have been prescribed in Sections 4, 6, 8 and 10 of the POCSO Act for various categories of sexual assaults on children. Hence, Section 6,on its plain language, leaves no discretion to the Court and there is no option but to impose the minimum sentence as done by the Trial Court. When a penal provision uses the phraseology “shall not be less than….”, the Courts cannot do offence to the Section and impose a lesser sentence. The Courts are powerless to do that unless there is a specific statutory provision enabling the Court to impose a lesser sentence. However, we find no such provision in the POCSO Act. Therefore, notwithstanding the 14 CRA No.1006/2025 fact that the respondent may have moved ahead in life after undergoing the sentence as modified by the High Court, there is no question of showing any leniency to him. Apart from the fact that the law provides for a minimum sentence, the crime committed by the respondent is very gruesome which calls for very stringent punishment. The impact of the obnoxious act on the mind of the victim/child will be lifelong. The impact is bound to adversely affect the healthy growth of the victim. There is no dispute that the age of the victim was less than twelve years at the time of the incident. Therefore, we have no option but to set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court and restore the judgment of the Trial Court.” 23. Reverting to the facts of the present case in light of above principles of law laid down by their Lordships of the Supreme Court, it is quite vivid from the statement of victim (PW-1) that the appellant used to make physical relation with her many times by threatening her. Further, when the victim refused to talk with him and object to make physical relation, he threatened her that he would kill her parents. The accused harassed the victim by calling her many times and forced her to make physical relation. Apart from that, PW-2, mother of victim deposed that her daughter hadn't earlier told her anything about the incident, but when the accused came to her shop and started quarrel, her daughter narrated about the incident to her. 24. Apart from that, based on the testimony of the Headmistress (PW-4) and the documentary evidence on record, particularly the 15 CRA No.1006/2025 Dakhil-Kharij Register (Ex.P-18/C) and the Seizure Memo (Ex.P- 06) containing the victim’s birth certificate, it stands duly established that the date of birth of the victim is 01.01.2007. The said date of birth is further corroborated by the statement of mother of victim PW-2. Considering that the incident occurred between 01.11.2020 and 01.10.2021, the victim’s age at the time of the occurrence was about 13 to 14 years, which is clearly below 18 years. Hence, it is conclusively proved that the victim was a minor at the time of the incident, attracting the provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. 25. In the result, taking into consideration the evidence of victim (PW- 1), mother of victim PW-2, Headmistress (PW-4), Dakhil-Kharij Register (Ex.P-18/C) and the Seizure Memo of birth certificate (Ex.P-06), we are of the considered opinion that the appellant had committed sexual intercourse with the minor victim many times by threatening to kill her parents and at the time of incident, she was minor and below the age 18 years. Thus, the trial Court has rightly convicted the appellant for the aforesaid offence. The conviction and sentence as awarded by the trial court to the appellant is hereby upheld. 26. Accordingly, the present criminal appeal is dismissed. The appellant is stated to be in jail and he shall serve out the remaining period of jail sentence as awarded to him by the learned trial Court. Registry is directed to send a copy of this 16 CRA No.1006/2025 judgment to the concerned Superintendent of Jail where the appellant is undergoing the jail sentence to serve the same on the appellant informing him that he is at liberty to assail the present judgment passed by this Court by preferring an appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court with the assistance of High Court Legal Services Committee or the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee. 27. The Registry is directed to transmit the certified copy of this judgment along with the record to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. SD/- SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Amardeep