1 2025:CGHC:18676 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 538 of 2016 1 - Jitendra Kumar Patwa S/o Sukhdev Prasad Patwa Aged About 27 Years R/o Village - Sulsuli, Police Station - Trikunda, District - Balrampur - Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh , Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Trikunda, District - Balrampur - Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh , Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellant(s) : Mr. D. N. Prajapati, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishabh Singh Deo, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Judgment on Board 24/04/2025 1. The appellant has filed the instant appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (henceforth ‘the Cr.P.C.') 2 questioning the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 05.04.2016 passed in Special Sessions Trial No. 03/2015 by the learned Special Judge, Sarguja (Ambikapur) (C.G.) has convicted and sentenced the appellant as under :- Conviction Sentence U/s 452 of IPC R.I. for 6 months and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of fine, additional imp. For 3 months U/s 354 of IPC R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of fine, additional imprisonment for 6 months. U/s 506 of IPC R.I. for 6 months U/s 323 of IPC R.I. for 3 months 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that on 10.11.2014 the prosecutrix was sleeping in her house along with her children. At about 11:30 p.m. she came out of the house for urination, at that time, the appellant entered into her house and caught hold her, upon which prosecutrix shouted, then the appellant pulled her due to which she received injury near her eye. After hearing the noise, her mother-in-law came there. They tried to caught hold the appellant but the appellant fled away. 3. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and appreciating evidence available on record, the trial Court vide judgment dated 05.04.2016 convicted and sentenced the appellant/accused for the offence punishable under Sections 452, 354, 506 and 323 of IPC in the manner as described above of this judgment. Hence, this appeal. 4. In order to prove the charges against the appellant, prosecution examined as many as 8 witnesses. Statement of appellant was also 3 recorded under Section 313 of CrPC in which he pleaded innocence and false implication. However, no defence witness was examined by the appellant. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the impugned judgment dated 05.04.2016 is perverse, erroneous, contrary to law, facts and circumstances. The learned Trial Court failed to appreciate that on the date of incident, the prosecutrix herself called the appellant and when she was caught red handed by her mother-in-law, then she has made false report against the appellant due to pressure of her mother-in-law and husband. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant and submits that the prosecution has successfully proved the commission of offense by the appellant beyond reasonable doubt and the appellant has been rightly convicted and sentenced by the trial Court, therefore, there is no illegality or infirmity in the finding of learned trial Court and the impugned judgment of the Court below needs no interference. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties, perused the judgment of the trial Court as well as other material available on record with utmost circumspection. 8. PW-1/ prosecutrix has deposed in her examination-in-chief that on 09.11.2014 her husband had gone to Banaras she was alone with her two children at home. The incident happened at 11.30 pm. At the time of the incident she had gone out to urinate. At that time the door of her house was open. She had gone to urinate at the side of the house. When she returned her house after urinating, the accused Jitendra 4 Patwa had entered her house. He started holding her hand and threatened to kill her. When her mother-in-law came after hearing the noise, the accused pushed her and she got hurt on her right eyebrow. When her mother-in-law tried to catch him, the accused ran away from there. When her husband returned home after some time, she told him about the incident. 9. PW-2/ husband of prosecutrix deposed in his examination-in chief that he is posted as Shiksha Karmi class-3 in Prathmik Shala Jawakhadi Palgi. The incident took place on 10.11.2014 at 11.30 pm. he had gone to Banaras on 09.11.14, a day before the incident. His wife and two children were at home. He returned home on 10.11.14 at around 12.15 pm. When he returned home, his mother and wife were restless and the children were crying. When he asked them the reason for crying and getting restless, his wife told him that she had gone out of the house to urinate a while ago, at that time the door was open. When she entered the house, she saw that Jitendra Patwa had entered the house and started holding her hand. Then she started screaming and on hearing the screams his mother Phulmati also came there. Seeing mother the accused pushed her, due to which his wife fell down and her right eyebrow got injured. Thereafter the accused fled from there. 10. PW-05/ mother-in-law of prosecutrix has deposed in her examination- in-chief that the incident took place on 10th November last year. On the date of the incident she was at her old house and her daughter-in-law Saraswati Devi was at her new house with her two children. It was around 11.30 pm. she heard daughter-in-law Saraswati Devi screaming and upon hearing her voice she went running towards her house and 5 saw that the accused Jitendra Patwa was there and he was fighting with her daughter-in-law. Then she asked the accused why are you fighting like this, after that the accused pushed the daughter-in-law and jumped out. Her daughter-in-law started crying and when she asked her then she told her that she had got an injury on her head. Her son Dilip was not at home that day, he had gone to Banaras that day. Then her son reached home from Banaras half an hour after the incident. Then she told him about the incident. The accused caught my daughter-in-law with the intention of insulting her. 11. After carefully analyzing the entire prosecution evidence, this Court comes to the conclusion that the accused entered the house of the prosecutrix and used criminal force on her with the intention of outraging her modesty and in the same sequence threatened to kill her. Thus, the prosecution has proved the offences under Sections- 452, 354, 506, 323 IPC against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, this Court has no hesitation to hold that the findings recorded by the Special Judge (Atrocities), Surguja (Ambikapur) convicting the appellant under aforesaid sections are based on due appreciation of the evidence on record and deserve to be maintained. 12. The judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 5.04.2016 passed by Special Judge (SC & ST Atrocities Act), Sarguja (Ambikapur) (C.G.) is maintained. 13. Accordingly, the present Criminal Appeal is dismissed. 14. The appellant is reported to be on bail. His bail bonds shall stand discharged with immediate effect and he be sent back to jail. 15. The Trial Court record along with a copy of this judgment be sent back 6 immediately to the trial court concerned for compliance and necessary action. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Madhurima