1 2026:CGHC:27384-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1553 of 2026 Sukram Salam S/o Rajau Ram Salam Aged About 19 Years R/o Village - Katulbeda P.S. Yedka Distt -Narayanpur (C.G.) ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer P.S. -Yedka, Distt - Narayanpur (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Appellant : Mr. A.N. Pandey, Advocate (through Legal Aid) For Respondent/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri R avindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, C.J. 03/07/2026 1. This criminal appeal under Section 415(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.04.2026 passed by the VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2026.07.04 15:43:21 +0530 2 learned Special Judge (Fast Track Special Court under the POCSO Act), Narayanpur, District Kondagaon (C.G.) in Special Case No. 05/2025, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 6(5)(l) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 20 years with a fine of Rs.5,000/-, with default stipulation of three months' additional rigorous imprisonment. 2. As per the prosecution case, on the basis of a written report lodged by the mother of the prosecutrix at Police Station Yedka, District Narayanpur, it was alleged that the appellant had enticed the minor prosecutrix on the pretext of marriage and established physical relations with her, as a result of which she became pregnant. At the time of lodging of the report, the prosecutrix was found to be carrying about eight months' pregnancy. On the basis of the said report, Crime No. 01/2025 was registered against the appellant. During investigation, the prosecutrix was medically examined, her statements and those of other witnesses were recorded, and after completion of investigation, the police filed a charge-sheet against the appellant for the offences punishable under Section 64(2)(e) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The learned trial Court, after framing charges and recording the evidence adduced by the prosecution as well as the defence, convicted and sentenced the appellant by the impugned judgment and order dated 22.04.2026. 3 3. At the outset, learned counsel appearing for the appellant (through Legal Aid) submits that another criminal appeal, being CRA No. 1229 of 2026, arising out of the same impugned judgment, has already been preferred by the appellant through his private counsel. He, therefore, seeks permission to withdraw the present appeal. 4. Learned State counsel has no objection to the prayer made on behalf of the appellant. 5. Considering the aforesaid submission and as another appeal bearing CRA No. 1229 of 2026 arising out of the same judgment has already been filed by the appellant through his private counsel, the present criminal appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. 6. Accordingly, this criminal appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice ved