1 / 9 2025:CGHC:57725 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 2255 of 2025 Dev Kumar Sahu S/o Late Ghasi Ram Sahu Aged About 31 Years R/o Village Aadil, Malkharauda, Police Station Malkharauda, District Sakti C.G. ... Appellant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Malkharauda, District Sakti C.G. ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh, Advocate For State : Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Judgment on Board 27/11/2025 1. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally. 2. The instant Criminal Appeal under Section 415 (2) of the BNSS is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 26/09/2025 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C., Sakti, District Janjgir Champa, C.G. in Special Sessions Trial (POCSO) No.06/2025 whereby the appellant has been convicted and 2 / 9 sentenced as under:- Conviction Sentence Under Section 74 of B.N.S. R.I. for Three Years and fine of Rs.2000/- and in default of payment of fine Thee month additional R.I. Under Section 10 of POCSO Act R.I. for 05 Years and fine of Rs.3000/- in default of payment of fine further Rigrous Imprisonment for 06 months. Under Section 3(2) (Va) of S.C./S.T. Act Rigrous Imprisonment for 03 Years and fine of Rs.2000/- in default of payment of fine further Rigrous Imprisonment for 03 Months. 3. The prosecution case in brief is that the complainant who is the mother of the prosecutrix (PW-1) appeared at Malkharoda police station and filed a written complaint. (Ex P.-1) to the effect that his daughter the prosecutrix aged 13 years is presently studying in class 6th in village XX. One Dev Prasad Sahu of village Adil used to run tuition classes in his home. His daughter, the prosecutrix, has also been visiting the accused Dev Prasad Sahu daily for the past one month. She was going to tuition from 07.30 am to 09.00 am. On 27.12.2024 at 07.30 am, his daughter/prosecutrix had gone to Dev Prasad Sahu's house for tuition. When the prosecutrix returned home at 09.00 am, she told her that during tuition, Dev Prasad Sahu touched her chest with bad intentions on 26.12.2024 at 08.00 am and also on 27.12.2024 at 08.00 am, then she came to know about the incident. On the basis of the aforesaid complaint of the complainant, the Malkharoda police station registered a First 3 / 9 Information Report (P.P.-2) against the accused Dev Prasad Sahu under Crime No. 336/2024 under Section 74 BNS and Section 8, 10 of the POCSO Act and Section 3 (2) (Va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2015) and took it into investigation. 4. The prosecution case is further that during the investigation, the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 180 BNSS (Ex.P.-13) from the lady police officer and the statement under Section 183 BNSS (Ex.P.- 6) in the court of the Judicial Magistrate, Sakti was recorded. The police prepared a site map (Ex.P.-3) of the incident and obtained a Patwari's site map. To ascertain the age of the accused, the original copy of the accused's birth certificate (Ex.P.-1) and a certified copy of the original mutation register (Ex.P.-9) from the State Primary School XXXX regarding the accused's birth were seized. The age of the accused was found to be that of a minor in the records. Regarding the accused's Scheduled Caste status, a certified copy of the Permanent Status Certificate (Permanent Status Certificate) was seized, which established that the accused was a member of a Scheduled Tribe. The accused was found to have committed a crime and was arrested pursuant to an arrest warrant (Ex.P.-15). Information regarding the arrest (Ex.P.-16) was provided to the accused's mother, Kamla Bai, and the accused was remanded to judicial custody. The statements of the witnesses in the case were recorded as they described them. After a thorough investigation, chargesheet number 21/2025 was prepared against the accused and 4 / 9 presented in the court. 5. On perusal of the presented charge sheet and the attached documents, it was prima facie shown that the accused Dev Kumar Sahu had committed the offence under Section 74 of the Indian Penal Code, 2023 and Section 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 3 (2) (Va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. On framing of charges under the said sections and reading out and explaining the contents thereof, the accused denied the charges and claimed trial. 6. When the accused was examined under Section 351 of the Indian Civil Defence Code, 2023, he stated that he was innocent and had been falsely implicated and expressed his desire to give defence evidence but he did not examine any witness in his defence before this Court 7. After the committal of the case the prosecution examined 11 witnesses ane exhibited 23 documents to bring home the guilt of the accused. The learned trial Court after completion of trial convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned in paragraph -1 of this Judgment. Hence this appeal. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that prosecutrix was not below the age of 18 years, prosecution has not proved properly the age of prosecutrix. He would next contend that there is no injury on the part of prosecutrix. He would next contend that there was a dispute between complainant and appellant for tuition fee, therefore, the victim 5 / 9 and her parents had falsely implicated the accused. He would next contend that the prosecutrix's family had not paid her fees for one month, leading to a quarrel with the accused. He would next contend that the prosecutrix's mother deliberately filed the false report to avoid payment of fees. He would next contend that the mother of prosecutrix has admitted that tuition fee was not paid and the appellant was demanding tuition fee to all student. He would next contend that the material witnesses have examined and they have admitted tuition fee was not given and appellant was demanding tuition fee to all student. He would next contend that the mother of prosecutrix has lodged report after two days and delay is not explained. He would lastly contend that no prosecution witness has supported the case of the prosecution, therefore, the impugned judgment passed by the trial Court requires interference by this Court and the appellant may be acquitted from the charges leveled against him and he may be released. 9. Per contra, learned State counsel would submit that the order of the Court below is well merited which do not call for any interference by this Court. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the evidence with utmost circumspection. 11. The first question arises before this Court for consideration is whether the prosecutrix was minor on the date of incident or not? 12. PW-4 (Headmistress) deposed that the prosecutrix was admitted in the 6 / 9 school on the basis of the birth register extract and that her date of birth as recorded in the school register is 06-10-2013. She produced the certified copy of the birth register (Ex-P-9) which was issued on the basis of the original Panchayat register. She specifically stated that the extract was prepared from the original register maintained in the Panchayat records. 13. PW-8 (Investigating Officer) proved that the original birth register (Ex- P7) was seized and produced before the Court and that the birth certificate (Ex-P1) was also collected from the Gram Panchayat. 14. Father of the prosecutrix PW-6 in cross-examination admitted that the correct date of birth is 06-10-2013, which tallies with the documentary record. 15. In view of Section 94 of the JJ Act, school and Panchayat birth records prevail over oral testimony. The prosecutrix was therefore 11 years 2 months 20 days on the date of incident. Thus, the prosecutrix was a minor. 16. The next question arises before this Court for consideration is whether prosecutrix belongs to the Scheduled Caste community or not? 17. PW-3 (Naib-Tehsildar) proved the caste certificate (Ex-P2) issued through the Government portal. He stated that after verification the prosecutrix was found belonging to Gond caste, which is a Scheduled Tribe. He also proved that the certificate bears digital authentication and 7 / 9 was issued in discharge of official duty. No challenge was made to this document in cross-examination. Hence, the prosecutrix was proved to be a member of Scheduled Tribe, attracting the SC/ST Act. 18. The next question arises before this Court for consideration is whether the offence was committed or not? 19. Prosecutrix PW-2 stated that she used to go to the appellant’s house for tuition. On several occasions, the appellant touched her chest with bad intention. When she resisted, he offered money and asked her not to tell anyone. Her statement was recorded under Section 164 CrPC (Ex-P6) which is consistent with her deposition. Her testimony remained firm and unshaken in cross-examination. 20. Mother (PW-1) deposed that her daughter told her that the appellant was touching her chest during tuition, therefore she stopped sending her to tuition. Her testimony corroborates PW-2. 21. Father (PW-6) stated that the appellant offered money to suppress the matter. He also stated that the appellant was known to the family and the child used to go for tuition to his house. Grandmother (PW-7) stated that the prosecutrix complained that the appellant was touching her chest and therefore tuition was stopped. PW-10 and PW-11 these witnesses supported the fact that the prosecutrix used to go to the appellant for tuition and that the incident was reported to police. 22. The appellant stated that he has been falsely implicated due to tuition fee 8 / 9 dispute. However, no evidence was produced to support this. The appellant himself admitted that children used to attend tuition at his house. 23. After going through the entire material available on record and upon re- appreciation of the oral as well as documentary evidence, this Court is of the considered opinion that the prosecution has succeeded in establishing beyond reasonable doubt that the prosecutrix was a minor Scheduled Tribe girl on the date of the incident and that the appellant subjected her to sexual assault with sexual intent. The testimony of the prosecutrix is natural, cogent and inspires confidence and stands duly corroborated by her mother, father, grandmother and other witnesses. The age of the prosecutrix is proved by the birth certificate, original birth register and school records, whereas her caste is established by the duly verified government caste certificate proved by the Revenue Officer. The defence has failed to bring on record any material to discredit the said evidence or to create any reasonable doubt. The findings recorded by the learned Special Judge are based on proper appreciation of evidence and correct application of law and do not suffer from any perversity or illegality so as to warrant interference by this Court. Accordingly, the conviction and sentenced as awarded by the trial Court to the appellant is hereby upheld. The present appeal lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. 24. It is stated at the Bar that the appellant is in jail. He shall serve out the sentence as ordered by the trial Court. 9 / 9 25. Registry is directed to send a copy of this judgment to the concerned Superintendent of Jail where the appellant is undergoing his 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. 26. Let a copy of this judgment and the original record be transmitted to the trial Court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu