1 CGHC010142052019 2026:CGHC:31216-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 337 of 2019 State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- City Kotwali, Mungeli, District- Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus Satish Kumar Tandan S/o Moti Lal Tandan Aged About 21 Years R/o Village- Devri (Sangva), Police Station- City Kotwali, Mungeli, District- Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Appellant/State : Mr. Rishi Raj Pithawa, Dy. Govt. Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate D.B:-Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal, Hon’ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Judgment on Board Per: Sanjay S. Agrawal, J. 22/07/2026 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 23/06/2018 PRASHANT DEWANGAN Digitally signed by PRASHANT DEWANGAN Date: 2026.07.22 17:35:56 +0530 2 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mungeli (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No. H 52/2015, whereby, the respondent has been acquitted with regard to the offence punishable under Sections 459, 354-B, 328 and 307 of IPC. 2. From perusal of the record, it appears that the respondent has been charge-sheeted with regard to the offence mentioned herein-above, on the basis of the report (Ex.P/2) lodged by the prosecutrix on 24/11/2015, wherein, it was alleged that on 04/11/2015, around 10:00 P.M., the respondent entered into her house through the window when she was alone and caught hold of her hand and tried to remove her clothes (salwar) and when she resisted and shouted, she was slapped by him, and has tried to kill her while administering phenyl forcefully, owing to which she became unconscious and, on 06/11/2015, she regained consciousness in the District Hospital at Mungeli and narrated the alleged incident to her parents. Based upon the alleged allegation, the respondent has been charged as such. 3. In order to establish the alleged allegation, the prosecutrix (PW-2) in her statement has reiterated the alleged allegations, as was leveled by her in her alleged report (Ex.P/2) lodged on 24/11/2015 with regard to the incident occurred on 04/11/2015, that the respondent entered into her house and has tried to remove the clothes (salwar) and has tried to kill her while administering phenyl. The alleged of her allegation is, however, 3 not found to be corroborated by others and, rather it found to be false, as the Dr. S.P. Baghel (PW-7), who examined her on 05/11/2015, has stated that she was not only fully conscious, but has informed him during the course of treatment that she herself has consumed the poison. 4. It appears further from her alleged report (Ex.P/2) that the respondent has tried to remove her clothes, but according to her statement (Ex.P/5) recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has exaggerated the story saying that her clothes was torn when he tried to remove her clothes. 5. That apart, parents were informed regarding the occurrence of the alleged incident by her on 06/11/2015, but none of them have lodged the report immediately thereafter and, instead the alleged report (Ex.P/2) was found to be lodged only on 24/11/2015, i.e. after passing of considerable period of 20 days while offering the explanation that she was ill because of poisoning. But, as observed herein-above based upon the testimony of the said doctor (PW-7), she was not only fully conscious at the relevant point of time but has consumed the poison herself. Her alleged version is, therefore, not only exaggerated in nature, but rather appears to be false and, therefore, no reliance could be placed upon her testimony. 6. In view of the aforesaid background, the trial Court, after taking note of these material facts, has not committed any 4 illegality in acquitting him from the commission of the alleged crime, so as to call for any interference in this appeal. 7. The appeal being devoid of merit is, accordingly, dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) (Narendra Kumar Vyas) JUDGE JUDGE Prashant