CGHC010003342025 2026:CGHC:29248-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 22 of 2025 Ajit Kerketta @ Dipa Papa S/o Shri Suleman Kerketta Aged About 44 Years R/o Village Girang Dipatoli, P.S. Jashpur, District Jaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Jashpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. ...Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Appellant : Shri Rajesh Kumar Jain, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri Jitendra Shrivastava, GA --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Judgment on Board Per R amesh Sinha, Chief Justice 13.07.2026 Heard Shri Rajesh Kumar Jain, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Shri Jitendra Shrivastava, learned GA, appearing for the respondent/State. 1. The appellant has preferred this Criminal Appeal filed under Section 415(2) of the BNSS 2023 against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 16.10.2024, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Additional charge FTC, Jashpur in Special Case (POCSO) No.19 Digitally signed by V PADMAVATHI Date: 2026.07.15 17:44:43 +0530 Cra 22 of 2025 2 of 2021, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced in the following manner with default stipulation: Conviction Sentence Under Section 363 of IPC RI for 5 years and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- Under Section 366-A of IPC RI for 5 years and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- Under Section 376(f) of lIPC in alternative Section 5(m)(n) of POCSO Act RI for 20 years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- Under Section 376(2)(n) of IPC in alternative Section 5(l) r/w Section 6of POCSO Act RI for 20 years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- All Jail sentences shall run concurrently 2. Case of the prosecution is that PW2, mother of the victim gave a written complaint to the Police on 30.07.2022 alleging that on 01.07.2022, her minor daughter was subjected to rape by the appellant and when she saw her private part, pain and redness was found there. She also disclosed that the appellant took her to his house and after lying her on his cot, and after removing her clothes, he committed rape upon her daughter, and threatened that if she disclosed the incident to any one, he will beat her. Based on the written complaint, FIR has been registered against the appellant for the offence under Sections 363, 366(A), 376(f), 376(2)(i), 376(2)(n) of the IPC and Section 4, 5(l), 5(m) and 6 of the POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences) Act, 2012. The victim was sent for her medical examination to the District Cra 22 of 2025 3 Hospital, Jashpur, where she was medically examined by the Dr P Kerketta, PW8 and gave report Ex.P12. While medically examining the victim, the doctor has noticed victim’s hymen torn, old scar over posterior commissure present, and she opined that sexual intercourse done with the victim. Another report was given by the doctor in a format, which is Ex.P13. Spot map Ex.P3 was prepared by the Police and Ex.P5 was prepared by the Patwari. With respect to age and date of birth of the victim, Police has seized the School Register vide seizure memo Ex.P8 and after retaining its attested true copy, original register was return to the School. According to the School report, date of birth of the victim is, 27.01.2013. The appellant was arrested on 31.07.2022 and he too was sent for his medical examination to the District Hospital, Jashpur, where he was medically examined by PW7, Dr JK Takda, who gave his report Ex.P9 and found the appellant capable to perform sexual intercourse. As the time of medical examination of the victim was conducted one month later from the date of alleged incident, vaginal swab of the victim could not be collected by the doctor. 3. Statement of the victim under Section 164 of the CrPC and statement of witnesses under Section 161 of CRPC has been recorded and after completion of usual investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the appellant before the learned trial Court for the offence under Sections 363, 366(A), 376(2)(f), 376(2)(i), 376(2)(n) of the IPC and Section 4, 5(l)(m) and (n) and 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. Cra 22 of 2025 4 4. The learned trial Court has framed charge against the appellant for the offence under Sections 363, 366(A), 376(f), 376(2)(n) of the IPC and Section 5(l)/6, Section 5(m)(n)/6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. The appellant denied the charge and claimed trial. 5. In order to prove the charge against the appellant, the prosecution has examined as many as 12 witnesses. Statement of the appellant under Section 313 of CRPC has also been recorded, in which he denied the circumstances appearing against him, and has submitted that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence. 6. After appreciation of oral as well as documentary evidence led by the parties, the learned trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant as has been mentioned in the earlier part of the judgment, hence this appeal. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. There are material omissions and contradictions in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, which cannot be made basis to convict the appellant in the offence in question. Report has been lodged after about one month and there is no explanation for lodging the belated report. No injuries were found on the body of the victim when she was medically examined. There is no reason to keep quite for about a month, when the mother of the victim came to know about the incident on the same day and she allegedly saw the injury on private part of the victim. He would further submit that the Cra 22 of 2025 5 victim was aged about 9-10 years and she was a tutored witness and deposed on the instance of her parents. He would submit that there is no other witness, who has seen the victim in the company of present appellant and he took her towards jungle. It is also submitted that the entire prosecution case is based on unsupported and uncorroborated evidence of the witnesses and such inconsistent evidence is not sufficient to hold the appellant guilty for the alleged offence. He would further submit that there is lack of cogent and clinching evidence against the appellant and he is entitled for acquittal. 8. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant and would submit that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. But for minor omissions or contradictions, the evidence of prosecution witnesses is fully reliable and sufficient to hold the appellant guilty that the appellant committed rape upon the minor victim. 9. In a case of rape, injuries always not necessary to be found on the body of the victim. There is no recent injury found on the body of the victim. The doctor, who medically examined the victim has noticed old injuries on her body, including the torn on her hymen. Even the delay in such type of offence does not matter and normally, a person may not have lodged the report immediately. More over, from the evidence of the witnesses, it appears that the appellant is relative (फू फू) of the victim. He would further submit that the evidence of the victim has duly Cra 22 of 2025 6 supported the prosecution case, and there is no any material to show that she is a tutored witness. She being victim of the offence, deposed strongly against the appellant that he committed the offence of rape with her. The evidence of the victim duly supported by her mother, PW2, and PW3. There is no reason for false implication of the appellant in the case and in his statement recorded under Section 313 CrPC, he has not explained about the same. The learned trial Court, after considering the entire evidence available on record, convicted the appellant and sentenced him, which does not suffer from any perversity, or illegality and the appeal is liable to be dismissed. 10. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents annexed with the appeal and have gone through the record of the learned trial court. 11. The appellant could not disputed the age of the victim. Though the victim disclosed her age to be 6 years on the date of recording her evidence, however, her mother, PW2 has stated that age of her daughter is nine years. From the evidence of PW3, age of the victim is six years. From the evidence of PW4, who is Teacher, and proved the School register Ex.P7c, the date of birth of the victim has been proved. Thus, age of the victim on the date of incident is proved by the prosecution that she was nine years at the time of incident, and the same has also been stated by the doctor, who medically examined her. Age of the victim that she was aged about nine years is not in dispute. Cra 22 of 2025 7 12. So far as the allegation of kidnapping and rape upon the minor victim is concerned, we again examine the evidence available on record. 13. PW1 is the victim. The learned trial Court after examining her IQ, recorded evidence. She stated in her evidence that the appellant, who is also her relative (फू फू) took her towards the jungle on the pretext that they will go in search of cattle. In the jungle, appellant committed rape upon her. He repeated his act of rape twice in his house also. In cross- examination, she admitted that she had not disclosed the incident to her mother. She also admitted that when the appellant committed rape upon her, blood was oozing out from her private part. Appellant is her neighbour and residing in the same vicinity. She firmly denied that the appellant has not committed any bad work with her. From the evidence of the victim, it clearly reveals that the victim was subjected to rape by the appellant. Nothing has come in her cross-examination which makes her evidence doubtful. The victim at such a tender age, firmly stated about the allegation of rape by the appellant, which she suffered and under the facts in which she made her evidence, she could be put in the platform of “sterling witness”. 14. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Santosh Prasad @ Santosh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar, 2020 (3) SSC 443, in which it was observed as under: Cra 22 of 2025 8 “5.4.2 In the case of Rai Sandeep alias Deepu [Rai Sandeep alias Deepu v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2012) 8 SCC 21], this Court had an occasion to consider who can be said to be a “sterling witness”. In paragraph 22, it is observed and held as under: “22 In our considered opinion, the “sterling witness” should be of a very high quality and calibre whose version should, therefore, be unassailable. The court considering the version of such witness should be in a position to accept it for its face value without any hesitation. To test the quality of such a witness, the status of the witness would be immaterial and what would be relevant is the truthfulness of the statement made by such a witness. What would be more relevant would be the consistency of the statement right from the starting point till the end, namely, at the time when the witness makes the initial statement and ultimately before the court. It should be natural and consistent with the case of the prosecution qua the accused. There should not be any prevarication in the version of such a witness. The witness should be in a position to withstand the cross-examination of any length and howsoever strenuous it may be and under no circumstance should give room for any doubt as to the factum of the occurrence, the persons involved, as well as the sequence of it. Such a version should have co-relation with each and every one of other supporting material such as the recoveries made, the weapons used, the manner of offence committed, the scientific evidence and the expert opinion. The said version should consistently match with the version of every other witness. It can even be stated that it should be akin to the test applied in the case of circumstantial evidence where there should not be any Cra 22 of 2025 9 missing link in the chain of circumstances to hold the accused guilty of the offence alleged against him. Only if the version of such a witness qualifies the above test as well as all other such similar tests to be applied, can it be held that such a witness can be called as a “sterling witness” whose version can be accepted by the court without any corroboration and based on which the guilty can be punished. To be more precise, the version of the said witness on the core spectrum of the crime should remain intact while all other attendant materials, namely, oral, documentary and material objects should match the said version in material particulars in order to enable the court trying the offence to rely on the core version to sieve the other supporting materials for holding the offender guilty of the charge alleged.” 15. PW2 is the mother of the victim. She stated in her evidence that on 28th July, when she came back from her work, she could not found her daughter in the house, and then, she asked the wife of the appellant about the victim and when she was cooking dinner, at about 8 pm, her daughter returned. After about 5-6 days, when she was working in the field, victim was with her in abnormal condition. When she asked her to go to the doctor, then she disclosed that the appellant committed rape upon her. She also disclosed that he committed the offence in her house, as well as in jungle. When she saw her private part, she noticed redness and swelling there. Then, she disclosed that her sister-in-law and then she lodged report in the Police Station, which is Ex.P1. In cross- examination, she stated that she informed the incident to her sister-in-law and thereafter, they lodged the report. She admitted that the victim Cra 22 of 2025 10 informed her that the appellant committed bad work with her. She also admitted that after death of her husband, the appellant was having an evil eye upon her and since she refused to sexually favour the appellant, he committed rape upon her daughter. From her evidence also, the evidence of victim has duly corroborated and the defence could not be able to extract any material, wo that her evidence could be disbelieved, or any false implication could be considered. She remained firm in saying whatever disclosed to her by the victim and it was the suggestion given by the defence in para-6 of her cross-examination that the victim informed her about the bad work committed with her by the appellant, and the appellant is having an evil eye upon her. 16. PW3 and PW-5 are the women Health workers. They stated in their evidence that mother of the victim informed that the appellant committed rape upon her daughter, and and when the victim was not feeling well, looking abnormal, she disclosed the incident to her mother. They took her to the doctor, and then, she disclosed the incident. They also stated that the appellant is her relative and then they disclosed the incident to her another friend and they approached through Sarpanch of the village and then report was lodged. In cross-examination they too remain firm that the victim disclosed the incident of rape committed by the appellant. Nothing substantial could be extracted to disbelieve their evidence. Cra 22 of 2025 11 17. PW-8, Dr P Kerketta, who medically examined the victim has stated in her evidence that she medically examined the victim. In her medical examination, she found victim’s hymen torn and injury was present. As per her opinion, victim was subjected to sexual intercourse and her MLC report is Ex.P12. In cross-examination, she admitted that the hymen would have been torned by playing and injury received during play. However, looking to the allegation made by the victim it could not be said that the injury noticed on the private part of the victim could have been caused during play. No such suggestion was given either to the victim or her mother that victim received injury during her play with her friends. Even if the recent injuiry could not be noticed by the doctor during medical examination that itself is not sufficient to disbelieve the entire prosecution case. 18. In the case of Satyapal vs State of Haryana (2009) 6 SCC 635, Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that even a victim of penetration is sufficient to constitute the offence of penetration assault. It is not necessary that there has to be some injury on private part of the victim. It has been observed that: “18. In Modi's Medical Jurisprudence, 23rd Edn., at pp. 897 and 928, it is stated: “To constitute the offence of rape, it is not necessary that there should be complete penetration of the penis with the emission of semen and the rupture of hymen. Partial penetration of the penis within the labia majora or the vulva or pudenda, with or without the emission of semen, or even an attempt at penetration is quite Cra 22 of 2025 12 sufficient for the purpose of law. It is, therefore, quite possible to commit legally, the offence of rape without producing any injury to the genitals or leaving any seminal stains. ... * * * In small children, the hymen is not usually ruptured, but may become red and congested along with the inflammation and bruising of the labia. If considerable violence is used, there is often laceration of the fourchette and the perineum” 19. So far as the minor contradictions are concerned, as has been argued by the learned counsel for the appellant, the minor contradictions which are trivial in nature does not absolve the appellant from the offence. 20. In case of State of Punjab vs Gurmit Singh and others (1996) 2 SCC 384, Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that: “21. Of late, crime against women in general and rape in particular is on the increase. It is an irony that while we are celebrating woman's rights in all spheres, we show little or no concern for her honour. It is a sad reflection on the attitude of indifference of the society towards the violation of human dignity of the victims of sex crimes. We must remember that a rapist not only violates the victim's privacy and personal integrity, but inevitably causes serious psychological as well as physical harm in the process. Rape is not merely a physical assault — it is often destructive of the whole personality of the victim. A murderer destroys the physical body of his victim, a rapist degrades the very soul of the helpless female. The courts, therefore, Cra 22 of 2025 13 shoulder a great responsibility while trying an accused on charges of rape. They must deal with such cases with utmost sensitivity. The courts should examine the broader probabilities of a case and not get swayed by minor contradictions or insignificant discrepancies in the statement of the prosecutrix, which are not of a fatal nature, to throw out an otherwise reliable prosecution case. If evidence of the prosecutrix inspires confidence, it must be relied upon without seeking corroboration of her statement in material particulars. If for some reason the court finds it difficult to place implicit reliance on her testimony, it may look for evidence which may lend *assurance* to her testimony, short of corroboration required in the case of an accomplice. The testimony of the prosecutrix must be appreciated in the background of the entire case and the trial court must be alive to its responsibility and be sensitive while dealing with cases involving sexual molestations.” 21. In case of State of Himachal Pradesh Vs Sanjay Kumar (2017) 2 SCC 51 Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the conviction can be based on the sole testimony of the victim unless there are cogent reasons for the court to be hesitant and valuing the statement at its face value, or to seek corroboration, it has been held that : “30. By no means, it is suggested that whenever such charge of rape is made, where the victim is a child, it has to be treated as a gospel truth and the accused person has to be convicted. We have already discussed above the manner in which the testimony of the prosecutrix is to be examined and analysed in order to find out the truth therein and to ensure that deposition of the victim is trustworthy. At the same time, after taking all due precautions which are necessary, when it is found that the Cra 22 of 2025 14 prosecution version is worth believing, the case is to be dealt with all sensitivity that is needed in such cases. In such a situation one has to take stock of the realities of life as well. Various studies show that in more than 80% cases of such abuses, perpetrators have acquaintance with the victims who are not strangers. The danger is more within than outside. Most of the time, acquaintance rapes, when the culprit is a family member, are not even reported for various reasons, not difficult to fathom. The strongest among those is the fear of attracting social stigma. Another deterring factor which many times prevents such victims or their families to lodge a complaint is that they find whole process of criminal justice system extremely intimidating coupled with absence of victim protection mechanism. Therefore, time is ripe to bring about significant reforms in the criminal justice system as well. Equally, there is also a dire need to have a survivor-centric approach towards victims of sexual violence, particularly, the children, keeping in view the traumatic long-lasting effects on such victims. 31. After thorough analysis of all relevant and attendant factors, we are of the opinion that none of the grounds, on which the High Court has cleared the respondent, has any merit. By now it is well settled that the testimony of a victim in cases of sexual offences is vital and unless there are compelling reasons which necessitate looking for corroboration of a statement, the courts should find no difficulty to act on the testimony of the victim of a sexual assault alone to convict the accused. No doubt, her testimony has to inspire confidence. Seeking corroboration to a statement before relying upon the same as a rule, in such cases, would literally amount to adding insult to injury. The deposition of the prosecutrix has, thus, to be taken as a whole. Needless to reiterate that the victim of rape is not an accomplice and her evidence can be acted upon without Cra 22 of 2025 15 corroboration. She stands at a higher pedestal than an injured witness does. If the court finds it difficult to accept her version, it may seek corroboration from some evidence which lends assurance to her version. To insist on corroboration, except in the rarest of rare cases, is to equate one who is a victim of the lust of another with an accomplice to a crime and thereby insult womanhood. It would be adding insult to injury to tell a woman that her claim of rape will not be believed unless it is corroborated in material particulars, as in the case of an accomplice to a crime. Why should the evidence of the girl or the woman who complains of rape or sexual molestation be viewed with the aid of spectacles fitted with lenses tinged with doubt, disbelief or suspicion? The plea about lack of corroboration has no substance (See Bhupinder Sharma v. State of H.P. 5). Notwithstanding this legal position, in the instant case, we even find enough corroborative material as well, which is discussed herein above.” 22. After having gone through the entire evidence available on record and the judgment passed by the learned trial court, we do not find any infirmity or perversity in the impugned judgment passed by the learned trial court convicting the appellant for the alleged offence of kidnapping and penetrative sexual assault upon the minor victim who was aged about 9 years at that time. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed. 23. Appellant reported to be in jail since 31.07.2022, he shall serve the entire sentence as imposed by the learned trial court. 24. Registry is directed to send a copy of this judgment to the concerned Superintendent of Jail where the appellant is undergoing his Cra 22 of 2025 16 jail sentence to serve the same on the appellant informing him that he is at liberty to assail the present judgment passed by this court by preferring an appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court with the assistance of High Court Legal Services Committee or the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee. 25. The record of the case along with a copy of this judgment be sent back immediately to the learned trial court concerned for compliance and necessary action. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice padma