1 2026:CGHC:22825-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 2058 of 2024 Abhishek Sahu S/o Ashok Sahu Aged About 28 Years At- Sundar Nagar, P/s DD Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant(s) versus State of Chhattisgarh Throgh Sho, P/s Ajak, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ...Respondent(s) (Cause-titles taken from Case Information System) For Appellant : Mr. Rajeev Shrivastava, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Akash Mishra, and Ms. Richa Patel, Advocates. For Respondent/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Deputy Government Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 14 .05.2026 1. Heard Mr. Rajeev Shrivastava, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Akash Mishra and Ms. Richa Patel, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondent. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2026.05.14 19:03:29 +0530 2 2. Though the matter is listed today for hearing on I.A. Nos. 2 of 2026 and 3 of 2026, applications for urgent hearing, and I.A. No. 4 of 2026, an application for grant of temporary bail for a period of one month, however, considering that the appellant has been in custody since 08.11.2024, and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the appeal is taken up for final hearing. 3. Learned State counsel submits that notice issued to the victim (PW-1) was duly served on 25.01.2025; however, no one has appeared on behalf of the victim to contest the present appeal. 4. The present criminal appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08.11.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Raipur (C.G.) (for short, “the learned trial Court”) in Special Criminal Case No. 54 of 2023, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced in the following manner: Conviction under Section Sentence Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, ‘IPC’) :Rigorous imprisonment (for short, ‘R.I.’) for 01 year and fine of Rs.1000/-, to default of payment of fine, 01 month R.I. more. Section 376 of the IPC :R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs.2000/-, to default of payment of fine, 02 months R.I. more. Section 3(2)(v) of the :R.I. for life and fine of Rs.2000/-, 3 Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, ‘Act of 1989’) to default of payment of fine, 02 months R.I. more. All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently. 5. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that the victim (PW-1) appeared before the Police Station, Scheduled Caste Welfare, Raipur, on 25.09.2023 and submitted a written complaint (Ex.P/1), stating that she is a resident of Tikrapara, Raipur. While searching for employment, she reached Katora Talab, where she obtained a job as a receptionist at Lumiere Spa Centre. She joined her duties on 29.07.2023 and her working hours were from 12:00 noon to 7:00 p.m. 6. It is alleged that on the very first day of her employment, i.e., on 29.07.2023, the appellant, being the owner/operator of the spa centre, asked her to stay late in the evening on the pretext of explaining the work of the spa. The appellant allegedly took the victim in his i20 car under the pretext of explaining the work, taking her out and providing food. Thereafter, he allegedly suggested that they should book a hotel room so that she could rest and the work could also be properly explained to her. 7. According to the prosecution, after reaching the hotel room, the appellant allegedly offered certain eatables and a cold drink mixed with some intoxicating substance to the victim, after consuming which she started losing consciousness. It is further alleged that while she was in 4 an unconscious condition, the appellant committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. When she regained consciousness the next morning, she experienced pain in her head and body and questioned the appellant regarding the incident, whereupon the appellant allegedly asked her to forget the incident and continue her work at the spa centre. 8. The victim further alleged that when she refused to continue working at the spa centre, the appellant threatened her by stating that a video of the incident had been recorded and that if she refused to continue working, the said video would be made viral. Owing to fear, she continued to work there. The appellant also allegedly assured her that her salary/payment would be increased. The victim further stated in her written complaint that the appellant had sexually exploited her on the pretext of providing employment. She also disclosed to the appellant that she belonged to a Scheduled Caste community. Despite having knowledge of the same, the appellant allegedly stated that nothing would happen even if she lodged a complaint at the police station, as he could manage the matter by paying money to the police authorities. 9. It was further alleged that the appellant abused and assaulted the victim in the presence of the staff members of the spa centre. When the victim informed the staff members regarding the incident, they allegedly advised her not to make any complaint, stating that the appellant could remove her from employment and implicate her in false cases. Due to such fear, none of the employees supported the victim. The victim also stated in her written complaint that information regarding the entire 5 incident and the alleged video had been shared with one Rohit Singh through a mobile phone. It was further alleged that the appellant is the owner of the spa centre and that, owing to his family’s political influence, people are afraid to lodge complaints against him. Accordingly, she requested that an offence be registered against the appellant and appropriate legal action be initiated against him. 10. On the basis of the aforesaid written complaint submitted by the victim, Crime No. 08/2023 was registered at Police Station Ajak, Raipur, District Raipur. 11. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed before the learned trial Court. 12. The learned trial Court framed charges against the appellant under Sections 376 and 506 of the IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The charges were read over and explained to the appellant, who denied the allegations and pleaded innocence. During his examination under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., the appellant also denied all incriminating circumstances appearing against him and claimed false implication. 13. In order to bring home the charges against the appellant, the prosecution examined as many as 19 witnesses and exhibited 32 documents. No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the defence. 6 14. Upon appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the learned trial Court, by judgment dated 08.11.2024, convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned in paragraph 04 of this judgment. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the present criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellant. 15. Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the appellant argued that the conviction of the appellant under Sections 376 and 506 of the IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989 is wholly unsustainable in law. It is submitted that the learned trial Court passed the impugned judgment without proper appreciation of the facts, evidence and material available on record and, therefore, the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence deserves to be set aside. 16. It is further submitted by the learned Senior Advocate that the learned trial Court failed to appreciate the material contradictions and inconsistencies in the statements of the victim as reflected in her written complaint, statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of the Cr.P.C., and her deposition before the learned trial Court. It is argued that several improvements and omissions were made during trial, including allegations regarding another hotel and subsequent incidents, which did not form part of her earlier statements. He also submitted that the FIR was lodged after an unexplained delay of nearly two months and that even prior to lodging of the FIR, the victim had approached Police Station Civil Lines in connection with a monetary dispute with the 7 appellant, but no allegation of rape or sexual assault was made at that time. 17. It is also contended by the learned Senior Advocate that the hotel register seized during investigation clearly demonstrates that the victim had visited the hotel on 31.07.2023 at about 6:00 a.m., contrary to the prosecution story that the incident had taken place on 29.07.2023 when she was unconscious. Despite such material contradictions, the learned trial Court failed to properly appreciate the evidence on record. He further stated that during cross-examination, the victim admitted that disputes had arisen between her and the appellant regarding salary/payment and that she had repeatedly contacted the appellant in relation thereto. She further admitted that police officials from Police Station Civil Lines had intervened in the said monetary dispute. It is argued that these admissions probabilise the defence case and create serious doubt regarding the prosecution story. 18. It is also submitted by the learned Senior Advocate that the learned trial Court failed to properly consider the medical evidence and FSL report (Ex.P/30), which do not support the allegation of forcible sexual intercourse. He also placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Tameezuddin alias Tammu vs. State of NCT of Delhi, Criminal Appeal No. 1289 of 2004 to contend that although the testimony of the victim deserves due weight, the same cannot be accepted mechanically where the prosecution story appears inherently improbable and contrary to the evidence available on record. 8 He further submitted that the conviction under Section 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989 is also unsustainable, as there is no evidence to establish that the alleged offence was committed on the ground that the victim belonged to a Scheduled Caste community. It is also argued that the caste certificate relied upon by the prosecution was not proved in accordance with law. Accordingly, it is submitted that the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence is contrary to law and evidence on record and, therefore, deserves to be set aside and the present appeal deserves to be allowed. 19. Per contra, learned State counsel opposed the submissions advanced on behalf of the appellant and submitted that the prosecution has successfully proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. It is argued that the testimony of the victim is reliable, trustworthy and duly corroborated by the FIR, and other material available on record. It is further submitted that merely because there are minor contradictions or omissions in the statements of the victim, the same would not discredit the core prosecution case. 20. Learned State counsel further submitted that the victim belongs to a Scheduled Caste community and the appellant was fully aware of her caste status. Despite such knowledge, the appellant sexually exploited the victim and threatened her with dire consequences. It is argued that the delay in lodging the FIR has been satisfactorily explained by the victim on account of fear, intimidation and threats extended by the appellant. He further contended that the evidence available on record 9 clearly establishes that the appellant had subjected the victim to sexual exploitation and criminal intimidation and that the learned trial Court, after proper appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, has rightly convicted the appellant under Sections 376 and 506 of the IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989. Accordingly, it is submitted that the present criminal appeal, being devoid of merits, deserves to be dismissed. 21. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the learned trial Court with utmost circumspection. 22. In the present case, the victim has been examined as PW-1. In her examination-in-chief, she deposed that she belongs to the “Ganda” caste falling within the Scheduled Caste category and that the appellant does not belong to her caste. She further stated that the appellant runs a spa centre at Katora Talab, Raipur, and that she was appointed there as a tele-caller on a monthly salary of Rs.8,000/- to Rs.9,000/-. She further deposed that on the date of the incident, after completion of work, the appellant informed her about a birthday party at the spa centre and requested her to stay back. 23. She further stated that thereafter she, along with the appellant and other boys and girls, roamed around during the night, and subsequently others left, whereas the appellant stopped her and took her at about 4:00 a.m. to Hotel Amit Residency. She deposed that she was not feeling well, was given a drink and some tablets by the appellant, and thereafter she fell asleep in the hotel room and woke up at about 12:00 10 noon. She further submitted that the appellant was present in the room and, upon enquiry, she was told not to think about what had happened. She further deposed that she resumed her work at the spa centre. She also stated that she felt unusual sensations and informed her brother, who advised her to lodge a report. 24. The victim further deposed that after 2–3 days, the appellant again took her to Hotel Pragya and forcibly established physical relations with her and, upon refusal, threatened her that he had recorded a video of the earlier incident and would make it viral. She further stated that thereafter she left the job, and when she demanded her salary/payment, the appellant assaulted her near Netaji Chowk, Raipur and refused to pay her remuneration. She explained the delay in lodging the FIR by stating that she was frightened and apprehensive that the matter would come to the knowledge of her family members. 25. In cross-examination, however, the victim admitted that she and the appellant had gone to Hotel Amit Residency at about 6:00–7:00 a.m. She further admitted that the room was booked in the name of “Khushboo Lahare” and that the hotel staff did not ask for her identity. Though she initially accepted the defence suggestion that she had gone to the hotel for rest, she later resiled by stating that she was on fast and could not properly understand the question, and reiterated the allegation of forcible sexual intercourse. 26. The victim further admitted that there was a dispute between her and the appellant regarding salary/payment dues and that she had 11 repeatedly contacted him through calls and messages. She also admitted that on 02.08.2023 a dispute regarding payment arose between them, during which police officials of Police Station Civil Lines intervened. She further admitted that she had approached the said police station with a complaint regarding non-payment of salary, and that the police informed her that the dispute was of monetary nature and no report was registered. She further admitted that even thereafter she continued to contact the appellant for payment. 27. In the present case, Dr. Kiran Dhruv (PW-11), Medical Officer, District Hospital, Kalibadi, Raipur, deposed that the victim was medically examined on 25.09.2023 pursuant to requisition Ex.P/19. On examination, the hymen was found ruptured and vaginal slides were prepared and sent for chemical analysis. However, she opined that opinion regarding recent sexual intercourse could be given only after chemical examination of the slides, and proved report Ex.P/19A. 28. The FSL report (Ex.P/30) is completely negative. No semen stains or human spermatozoa were detected in the exhibits sent for examination. The forensic evidence, therefore, does not corroborate the prosecution allegation of sexual assault. 29. From the evidence of Dr. Mamta Pandey (PW-6) and Jyotsna Manjhi (PW-18) along with Ex.P/28 and Ex.P/31, it stands established that the victim belongs to “Ganda” caste falling under the Scheduled Caste category. 12 30. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Dinesh @ Buddha v. State of Rajasthan (2006 AIR SCW 1123) has held that applicability of Section 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989 requires proof that the offence was committed “on the ground that the victim belongs to Scheduled Caste/Tribe”, failing which the provision is not attracted. 31. Similarly, in Deepak Gulati v. State of Haryana, (2013) 7 SCC 675, it has been held that conviction under Section 376 IPC requires clear proof that consent was vitiated by deception at inception; however, the principle applies only where foundational facts of inducement or deception are established. 32. In the present case, there is no consistent prosecution case that the appellant, at the inception, induced the victim on any false promise or deception. The allegations are primarily of intoxication, unconsciousness and subsequent threats. Therefore, the case is required to be examined strictly on the touchstone of credibility of evidence, material contradictions, and medical/scientific corroboration available on record. 33. A careful scrutiny of the evidence reveals material inconsistencies in the testimony of the victim. While she alleges unconsciousness and forcible sexual intercourse, her own admissions demonstrate voluntary association with the appellant, continuous interaction, and repeated communication even after the alleged incident. 34. The victim further admitted existence of repeated monetary disputes between herself and the appellant, intervention by police 13 authorities regarding payment disputes, and continued communication with the appellant for recovery of salary/payment. These admissions clearly indicate that the relationship between the parties was substantially influenced by employment and monetary disputes, which materially affects the credibility of the prosecution story. However, this crucial aspect has not been properly appreciated by the learned trial Court. 35. It is well settled that though conviction can be based on the sole testimony of the victim, such testimony must inspire confidence and should be of sterling quality. In the present case, the testimony of the victim suffers from material contradictions, improvements, and admissions which go to the root of the prosecution case. Her conduct, continued interaction with the appellant even after the alleged incident, admitted monetary disputes, and lack of corroboration from medical and scientific evidence render her testimony unsafe for sustaining conviction solely on its basis. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered opinion that the victim cannot be treated as a sterling witness whose testimony alone can safely be relied upon for recording conviction. 36. These contradictions and inconsistencies strike at the very root of the prosecution case and render the version of the victim unreliable in absence of cogent independent corroboration. 37. So far as the conviction under Section 506 IPC is concerned, the allegation relating to threat of making an alleged video viral is vague, unsubstantiated, and devoid of material particulars. No specific 14 evidence regarding the exact time, place, or manner in which such alleged threat was extended has been brought on record. 38. More importantly, despite such alleged threat, the victim admittedly remained in contact with the appellant for monetary claims. Such conduct is inconsistent with existence of any genuine or sustained fear or alarm, which is an essential ingredient for constituting an offence under Section 506 IPC. In absence of credible evidence establishing intimidation causing reasonable apprehension, conviction under Section 506 IPC cannot be sustained. 39. The medical evidence also does not conclusively support the prosecution version, as no definite opinion regarding recent sexual intercourse was given during medical examination and the same was left subject to forensic examination. Furthermore, the FSL report is entirely negative. No semen stains or human spermatozoa were detected in the exhibits sent for examination. Thus, the scientific evidence does not corroborate the allegations made by the victim. 40. The cumulative effect of the medical evidence, negative FSL report, and material contradictions in the testimony of the victim creates serious doubt regarding the veracity of the prosecution case. It is a settled principle of criminal jurisprudence that where two views are possible, the one favouring the accused must be adopted. 41. In view of the evidence available on record, the essential ingredients of the offences under Sections 376 and 506 IPC are not proved beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecution has failed to 15 establish absence of consent, coercion, or criminal intimidation in a legally sustainable manner. 42. Similarly, invocation of Section 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989 is wholly unsustainable in absence of any evidence demonstrating that the alleged offence was committed on account of the caste identity of the victim. Mere proof that the victim belongs to a Scheduled Caste community is insufficient unless it is further established that the offence was committed because of such caste status. 43. The learned trial Court failed to properly appreciate the material contradictions, admissions of the victim, medical evidence, and scientific evidence in their correct perspective. The findings recorded by the learned trial Court are thus based on incomplete and improper appreciation of evidence and therefore cannot be sustained in law. 44. Accordingly, the criminal appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment of conviction and sentence is set aside. The appellant is acquitted of all charges under Sections 376, 506 IPC and Section 3(2) (v) of the Act of 1989. The appellant is reported to be in custody and shall be released forthwith, if not required in any other case. 45. I.A. Nos. 2 of 2026 and 3 of 2026, seeking urgent hearing, as well as I.A. No. 4 of 2026, seeking temporary bail, do not survive for consideration in view of the final adjudication of the appeal and are accordingly disposed of. Consequently, all other interlocutory applications, if any, pending in the present appeal also stand disposed of. 16 46. Keeping in view of the provisions of Section 437-A of the CrPC (Now Section 481 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023), the appellant is directed to furnish a personal bonds in terms of from No.45 prescribed in the Code of Criminal Procedure of sum of Rs.25000/- with two reliable sureties in the like amount before the Court concerned which shall be effective for a period of six months alongwith an undertaking that in the event of filing of special leave petition against the instant judgment or for grant of leave, the aforesaid appellant on receipt of notice thereon shall appear before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 47. The learned trial Court record alongwith the copy of this judgment be sent back immediately to the trial Court concerned for compliance and necessary action. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan