1 2025:CGHC:56621 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 150 of 2022 State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus Deepak Banjare S/o Mohan Banjare, Aged About 20 Years R/o. Village Khudubhata, P.S. Masturi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Appellant/State : Mr. Arpit Agrawal, Panel Lawyer For Respondent : Mr. Pravin Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate appears along with Mr. Vikas Patel, Advocate Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Justic e Sanjay S. Agrawal Judgment on Board 20/11/2025 1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant/State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, questioning the legality and propriety of the judgment dated 02/11/2021 passed by First F.T.S.C. (POCSO)/Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur (C.G.) in Special Sessions Case No.83/2020, whereby, the respondent has been acquitted with regard to the offence PRASHANT DEWANGAN Digitally signed by PRASHANT DEWANGAN Date: 2025.11.21 10:27:25 +0530 2 punishable under Sections 294, 354, 354-D and 506 (Part-II) of IPC, read with Sections 8/12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as “the POCSO Act”). 2. From perusal of the record, it appears that, a report (Ex.P/3) was lodged by the prosecutrix before the Police Station- Sarkanda, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) alleging interalia that, on the date of incident, i.e., 26/05/2020, the respondent called her at about 01:00 A.M. in order to talk to her and, threatened to kill her if she would not come and since her parents were not at home, therefore, she came out and asked him, why are you calling, owing to which, he told that, he loves her and, abruptly caught hold of her hand and, thereafter, touched her chest and backside of her body and when she refused to love as desired by him, he, then, assaulted her on her right cheek and backside of her body, who after escaping herself, informed the alleged incident to her uncle and, in the morning around 05:00 A.M., on the said fateful day, her parents went to his house and, around 12:00 P.M., he along with others came near her house and then returned back. 3. The respondent has, thus, been charge-sheeted with regard to the offence as mentioned herein-above based upon her alleged allegations. 4. Although, it was alleged by the prosecutrix in her alleged report (Ex.P/3) that, on the said fateful day, she was called by him and, tried to outrage her modesty as such not only by caught hold of her hand but also had touched her chest and backside of her 3 body. But, the said fact was, however, not found to be reflected from her statement (Ex.P/5) recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., as it was stated therein that he had neither touched her chest nor had touched the backside of her body. Even in her testimony, as revealed from para 8 of her cross-examination, it appears that no incident as such touching her chest by him, was done and, the said fact was also admitted by her that since it was not done, she has, therefore, not narrated as such when her statement (Ex.P/5) was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. It is, thus, evident that the alleged allegation of her as leveled by her in report (Ex.P/3) was a false one and, no reliance, therefore, could be placed upon such an allegation in order to attribute the respondent for the commission of the alleged crime. 5. In view of the aforesaid background, the trial Court has, therefore, not committed any illegality in acquitting the respondent from the commission of the alleged crime, so as to call for any interference in this appeal. 6. The appeal, being devoid of merit is, accordingly, dismissed. Sd/- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) Judge Prashant