1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1676 of 2025 1 - XYZ S/o ABC, R/o XYZ ... Appellant versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Bodhghat, District- Bastar, (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Ms. Surya Kawalkar Dangi, Advocate. For State : Shri Vivek Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Judgment on Board 23.09.2025 1. Although, the appeal was listed for consideration on application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail, however, with the consent of the parties, the appeal is heard finally. 2. In compliance of the order dated 09.09.2025, a report has been submitted by the State counsel obtained from Medical Officer, Central Jail, Jagdalpur, in which it has been reported that although the appellant is suffering from mental illness, however, he is taking treatment from Medical College Hospital Dimrapal and regular medicines are being provided to him. 3. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.06.2025 passed by the Special Judge (Protection of Children from Digitally signed by INDRAJEET SAHU Date: 2025.10.28 10:16:33 +0530 2 Sexual Offences Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, FTSC, Jagdalpur, Bastar in Special Sessions Case (POCSO) No.61/2023 whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced in the following manner: Conviction U/s Sentence awarded 294 IPC (4 times) RI for 3-3 months (total four times) 506-Part-II IPC (4 times) RI for 1-1 Year (total four times) 354-A IPC (4 times) RI for 1-1 year (total four times) 8 of POCSO Act (2 times) RI for 3-3 years (total two times) with fine of Rs.500-500/- (total 1000/-), in default of payment of fine, additional RI for 1-1 months. 4. The prosecution case in brief is that, the appellant is the father of victim. On 29.11.2023, the grandmother of the victim (i.e. mother of appellant herein) lodged a written complaint Ex.P/1 to the police station with an allegation that her son/appellant is regularly abusing them with obscene words and outraging the modesty of her daughter and granddaughters and sexually harassed them. They are mentally harassed by the appellant and threaten to life. On 29.11.2023 at about 5:30-6 PM the appellant came to her house and outraged her and her granddaughters modesty. He also threatened her to kill them. On the basis of written complaint, an FIR Ex.P/2 was registered against the appellant for the offence under Sections 354,354-A,506 and 294 IPC and Section 8 of POCSO Act. Spot map Ex.P/3 was prepared by the police. Marksheet of both the victims were seized vide seizure memo Ex.P/4 in which the date of birth of victim-A was recorded as 19.07.2009 and victim-2 as 21.01.2011. School register was also seized vide seizure memo Ex.P/8 and after retaining attested true copy of school register vide Ex.P/9-C, the original was returned back to 3 school. Spot map Ex.P/11 was prepared by the Patwari. The appellant was arrested on 29.11.2023. 5. Statement of witnesses under Section 161 CrPC and statement of victims under Section 164 CrPC were recorded and after completion of usual investigation, charge sheet was filed before the trial court against the appellant for the offence under Sections 354,354-A,506 and 294 IPC and Section 8 of POCSO Act. The trial court framed charge against the appellant for the offence under Sections 294 IPC (four counts), 506-II IPC (four counts), 354 IPC (two counts), 354-A IPC (four counts) and Section 8 of POCSO Act (two counts). The appellant denied the charge and claimed trial. 6. In order to prove charge against the appellant, the prosecution has examined as many as 7 witnesses. Statement of the appellant under Section 313 CrPC was also recorded in which he denied the circumstances that appears against him, plead innocence and have submitted that he has been falsely implicated in the offence as his family members do not like him. 7. After appreciation of oral as well as documentary evidence led by the parties, the trial court convicted the appellant and sentenced him as mentioned in the earlier paragraph of this judgment. Hence this appeal. 8. Learned counsel for appellant would submit that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. There are material omissions and contradictions in the evidence of prosecution witnesses. There is no legally admissible evidence with respect to age of victims. The evidence of victims are not corroborated by any other evidence. Only to settle their personal grudge as the appellant divorced his wife 4 in the year, 2019 and when he tried to meet his daughters, the report has been lodged by the complainant only to keep away the appellant from his daughters. Total improbable story has been developed by the complainant. Therefore, the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant is bad in law and the same is liable to be set aside and the appellant is entitled for acquittal. 9. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes and have submitted that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. But for minor omissions of contradictions, the evidence of the victims fully supported the prosecutions case. Their evidence does not require any corroboration as they themselves are victims of the offence. Heinous offence of outraging modesty has been committed by their own father and there is no reason for his false implication by his own mother. There are sufficient evidence against the appellant that he outraged their modesty for which he has rightly been convicted by the trial court and his appeal is liable to be dismissed. 10.I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of trial court. 11. PW-1 is the complainant and mother of appellant. She stated in her evidence that on 29.11.2023 when she came back to her house from duty, she saw the appellant dragging her daughter & two granddaughters and abusing them with filthy language. He was also outraging the modesty of her granddaughters. He was pressing their breasts and buttocks. He also made comments upon them that they will be sexually exploited by his friends also. He also threatened them that he will kill them. By the act of the appellant, she lodged a written 5 complaint Ex.P/1 and FIR Ex.P/2 was registered. When the leading question was asked, she admits that the appellant made vulgar gesture by taking out his private part. In cross examination, she stated that due to his furious behavior he had gone to jail on many occasions earlier. She also admits that the appellant demanded his share from the property. 12.From her evidence it discloses that the complainant and her daughter and granddaughters were so much of fear from the conduct of the appellant. She remain stuck in saying that the appellant outraged the modesty of her daughter and granddaughters. The defence could not extract any material from her cross examination so that her evidence can be disbelieved. Further, it is also important to note here that PW-1 is the mother of appellant and she is saying against her own son. 13.PW-2 is the victim-1 and she has stated in her evidence that on 19.09.2023 when she came back from her school and changing her dress, her father/appellant came inside the room and abused her with filthy language and when she was coming out from room, the appellant dragged her inside the room and tried to outrage her modesty saying that he will sexually exploit her. He made vulgar comments upon her and her other family members and when they called the police, they took him with them. Earlier also her father outraged her modesty by pressing her breasts and private part. In cross examination, she too remain firm in saying that she was being suffered by the act of outraging her modesty by her father. She denied that she deposed on the instance of her Aunts and grandmother. Nothing extracted from her evidence which makes her evidence doubtful and she fully supported 6 the prosecution’s case. She being victim stated about the instances of incident committed by the appellant with her and in view of her deposition, her evidence did not require to be corroborated by any other evidence. 14.PW-5 is victim-2. She also stated the same facts as stated by PW-2. She too have stated that on the date of incident when she came back from her school, her father came there, outraged her modesty and made vulgar comments upon her and her other family members. Thereafter, they called the police by dial-112 and send the appellant with them. She too remain firm in making allegation against her own father and nothing substantial could be extracted from her cross examination to disbelieve her evidence. 15.Another witness PW-6 is the maternal aunt of victims who was also present on the spot at the time when incident occurred. She too have stated that on the date of incident when she was giving tuition to the students, her two niece came from school. At the same time, the appellant also came there and outraged the modesty of her two niece and made vulgar comments upon them. Despite their protest, he outraged modesty of her niece and her also. They called police by dial- 112 and thereafter police came there. When the leading question was asked from her also, she fully supported the prosecution’s case. In her cross examination, though minor contradiction was pointed out by the defence, however, she remain firm in saying that appellant outraged the modesty of her two niece and made vulgar comments upon them and abused with filthy language. Being sister of appellant, her 7 presence on the spot could not be disbelieved and she fully supported the case of prosecution and victims. 16.Although, learned counsel for the appellant made submissions that there is no sufficient evidence with respect to age of victims, however, the school register Ex.P/9-C & P/10-C is available on record which shows that victims were minor on the date of incident. PW-3 is the Principal of School from where school records were seized. Although it comes in her evidence that she is not the author of school register, however, in view of evidence of two victims PW-2 & PW-5, in which their date of birth and age have not been challenged by the appellant, the evidence of PW-3 is admissible with respect to age of victims that they were minor at the time of incident. 17.From the entire evidence led by the prosecution, the trial court came into conclusion that the appellant sexually harassed the victims i.e. his own daughters, his own mother and sister by pressing their breasts, hurling filthy abuse and made vulgar comments upon them by showing his private part also. There are sufficient evidence against the appellant for his conviction in the alleged offence. 18.Considering the entire evidence available on record, this court is also in agreement with the findings recorded by the trial court convicting the appellant for the alleged offence and I do not find any scope for interference in the appeal filed by the appellant. 19.Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. The appellant is reported to be in jail since 30.11.2023. He shall serve the entire sentence as awarded by the trial court. 8 20.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. 21.Record of trial court be sent back along with copy of this judgment for necessary compliance. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge inder