1 2025:CGHC:58795-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No.108 of 2018 Ku. Asmita D/o Shri Santosh Gayakward Aged About 24 Years Caste Satnami, R/o Village Ahiwara, Ward No. 5, Post Ahiwara, Tahsil Dhamdha, P. S. Nandani District Durg (C.G.) ... Appellant (Prosecutrix/Complainant) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station A J A K District Durg (CG) 2 - Tomeshwar S/o Dwarika Dewangan Aged About 22 Years R/o Ward No. 5, Rajhara Camp, Ahiwara, P. S. Nandani District Durg (CG) (Accused) ... Respondents For Appellant : Shri Mirza Keshar Beg, Advocate For Respondent No.1/State : Shri Sachchidanand Yadav, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.2 : Shri Varunendra Mishra, Advocate DB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal & Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal Judgment On Board Per Sanjay S. Agrawal, J 04/12/2025 1) This appeal has been preferred by the prosecutrix under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, questioning the legality and propriety of the judgment dated 02/11/2017, passed by the learned Special Judge, Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Durg (C.G.) in Special Case No.14/2015, whereby, the respondent-Tomeshwar has been acquitted with regard to SATISH TUMANE Digitally signed by SATISH TUMANE Date: 2025.12.05 10:50:14 +0530 2 the offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC, read with Sections 3(1)(xii) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as, “the Act, 1989”). 2) From perusal of the record, it appears that an FIR (Ex.P-1/Ex.P-12) was lodged by the prosecutrix on 11/03/2015 before the Police Station Nandini, District Durg, alleging inter alia, that the respondent while alluring her on the pretext of marriage, has committed sexual intercourse with her on 22/09/2014 and used to made illicit relations with her continuously upto 31/01/2015, whenever her parents were not at home. It is alleged further that on 31/01/2015, the respondent has refused to marry with her, as she belongs to Scheduled Caste community and, thereafter, she disclosed the alleged incident to her parents and after consultation with them, a report was lodged and, based upon which, the respondent has been charge-sheeted with regard to the offence mentioned herein-above. 3) In order to establish the alleged allegations, the prosecutrix was examined as PW-1 and, from perusal of para-8 of her testimony, would reveal the fact that she herself has refused to marry with him, as both belongs to different caste and, instead, the respondent was found to be adamant to marry with her. Therefore, it cannot be said that he refused to marry with her on 31/01/2015 after making the alleged physical relations, as alleged by her in her alleged report. It is to be seen further, as revealed from her testimony and the report lodged by her, that despite of her long relation with the respondent, she did not disclose 3 the same to her parents, nor any proper explanation was offered by her as to why it was not disclosed to her parents. 4) Pertinently to be noted here further, as revealed from para-14 of her testimony, that she had come to the Court for recording her statement with one Rajkumar Patil, with whom, she was living illegally and, because of that, his wife, namely, Smt. Amin Patil (DW-1) was driven out from the house by them and, was compelled to institute the proceedings for grant of maintenance for herself and children under Section 125 Cr.P.C., as revealed from her (DW-1) testimony. Moreover, the prosecutrix has received the amount from the Government, after lodging the alleged report against the respondent, as revealed from para-41 of her testimony. 5) What is, therefore, reflected from her testimony that the alleged relation of her was made with the respondent from 22/09/2014 upto 31/01/2015, but the said fact was never disclosed by her to her parents, nor the respondent has refused to marry with her, as alleged by her and, instead, she was kept silent despite of her long relations with him and, even Dr. Kalpana Sharma (PW-5), who examined her, was not found any injuries on her body. The alleged of her conduct would, thus, lead to an irresistible conclusion that she was a consenting party for her alleged relations with the respondent. 6) In view of the aforesaid background, we do not find any infirmity in the judgment under appeal passed by the trial Court acquitting the respondent for the commission of the alleged crime, so as to call for any interference in this appeal. 4 7) Consequently, the appeal, being devoid of merit is dismissed. SD/- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) Judge SD/-- (Radhakishan Agrawal) Judge Tumane