1 2026:CGHC:12088-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1511 of 2025 Nabi Alam Khan S/o Altalf Hussain Aged About 51 Years R/o Bharat Nagar, Jhanda Chowk Police Station Gudiyari, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Gudiyari Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 13.03.2026 1. Heard Mr. Awadh Tripathi, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. Sourabh Sahu, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/respondent. MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2026.03.17 11:40:13 +0530 2 2. This criminal appeal under Section 14 A (1) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 arises out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 03.07.2025 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge under Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) in Special Sessions Case No.53/2023, whereby the accused- appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under :- Conviction Sentence Under Section 376(2) (k)(n) of the Indian Penal Code. Rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs.2000/-, in default of payment of fine amount, additional rigorous imprisonment for 2 months. Under Section 313 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 Rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine amount, additional rigorous imprisonment for 01 month. Under Section 3(2)(v) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Life Imprisonment and fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine amount, additional R.I. for 02 months. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently 3. Prosecution story in brief is that on 05.12.2024 the victim appeared at Police Station Gudhiyari, Raipur and submitted a written complaint stating that she was residing as a tenant in the house of Loknath Maharaj near Murra Bhatti, Jyoti School. During that period, the accused had come to the said house for installation of a grill. On being asked by the landlady, the victim prepared tea for the accused and his 3 worker, during which she was introduced to the accused. The victim informed the accused that she was in search of suitable employment, upon which the accused stated that he required a female worker and provided her with the address of his shop. 4. It is further the case of the prosecution that while searching for employment, the victim reached the shop of the accused situated at Jagannath Chowk, where she was engaged for work such as taking orders for steel materials and maintaining attendance of labourers. After about one to two weeks, the accused allegedly proposed that since the victim travelled from a distant place, he could arrange a rented accommodation for her near Murra Bhatti through his acquaintance. Accordingly, the accused arranged a rented house for the victim. 5. The prosecution further alleges that on 15.06.2022 at about 2:30 PM, when the victim was alone in the shop and no other workers were present, the accused came, closed the shutter and expressed his intention to keep her in a relationship, assuring to fulfil her needs and treat her like his wife. It is alleged that on the pretext of marriage and by inducement, the accused established physical relations with the victim against her will. Thereafter, he allegedly continued to visit the rented house of the victim and forcibly established physical relations with her, and on her resistance, assaulted her, due to which she did not disclose the incidents to anyone out of fear. 6. It is also alleged that on 20.05.2023, when the victim became pregnant, she informed the accused and insisted on marriage. The 4 accused allegedly asked her to wait and administered certain medicines (Arbasan) to terminate the pregnancy, promising to marry her later. The prosecution further alleges that the accused continued physical relations with the victim and avoided marriage. On 09.09.2023, he allegedly again visited the rented house of the victim and forcibly established physical relations despite her refusal and ultimately refused to marry her. On the basis of the said written complaint, Crime No. 402/2023 was registered at Police Station Gudhiyari, Raipur. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed before the competent Court. 7. Thereafter, charges under Section 376(2)(k)(n) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 were framed against the accused. The accused denied the allegations and pleaded not guilty during his examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 8. In support of its case, the prosecution examined several witnesses including the victim, medical officers, investigating officers and other material witnesses, whereas the defence did not adduce any evidence. 9. After appreciation of evidence available on record, the learned trial Court has convicted the accused/appellant and sentenced him as mentioned in paragraph-2 of the judgment. Hence, this appeal. 10. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. Firstly, it is contended that the 5 learned Trial Court has failed to properly appreciate the material facts and evidence available on record while passing the impugned judgment. It is argued that the testimony of prosecution witnesses creates serious doubt regarding the prosecution story. Learned counsel submits that Loknath Dubey (PW-1), in whose house the victim and another girl were residing, has clearly stated that the rent of the premises was paid in advance by the appellant and that after making such payment the appellant never visited the house. He further deposed that he had never seen the victim and the appellant together in any objectionable condition. It is further submitted that there are material contradictions between the statements of the victim and the said witness regarding the manner in which the victim first came into contact with the appellant and the circumstances under which the rented accommodation was arranged. The victim stated that she first met the appellant when he came to install a grill at the house where she was residing, whereas the house owner’s testimony suggests that the appellant himself had taken the victim and her friend to the rented premises and paid advance rent. Learned counsel also emphasizes the unexplained delay in lodging the FIR. As per the prosecution case, the first alleged incident occurred on 15.06.2022, whereas the written complaint was submitted only on 12.09.2023, i.e., after about one and a half years, during which period the victim admittedly did not inform anyone or make any complaint. It is further argued that there are material omissions and contradictions between the written complaint, the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and the statement under 6 Section 164 Cr.P.C., particularly regarding the allegation of false promise of marriage and the knowledge of the appellant about the caste of the victim. 11. Secondly, learned counsel submits that the testimony of other prosecution witnesses also weakens the prosecution case. Sister of the victim (PW-3), admitted in her cross-examination that she came to know about the alleged incident only after the victim lodged the report. She further stated that she used to receive monthly payments of Rs.8,000- Rs.12,000 from the appellant through Phone-Pay towards the salary and petrol expenses of the victim, which contradicts the victim’s statement that no such payments were made. It is further contended that evidence of Zeeshan Khan, (PW-10) a worker at the appellant’s shop, indicates that there was a dispute between the appellant and the victim regarding monetary transactions and that the victim had threatened to lodge a complaint due to such dispute. He also stated that all employees were aware that the appellant was already married and had a child. Learned counsel further submits that the medical evidence does not support the prosecution case, as the examining doctor could not give any definite opinion regarding sexual assault and recorded that the victim herself stated she was in a love relationship with the appellant since 2022. No external injuries were found on her body and the FSL report also did not detect presence of sperm on the seized articles. It is therefore argued that the relationship between the parties was consensual and that the learned Trial Court failed to properly consider this aspect. It is also contended that the ingredients of the relevant 7 provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act have not been established, as there is no evidence to show that the alleged offence was committed on the ground of the victim’s caste or with knowledge thereof in the manner required by law. On these grounds, the impugned judgment is stated to be unsustainable and liable to be set aside 12. On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that the impugned judgment passed by the learned trial Court is well-reasoned and based on proper appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on record. It is contended that the testimony of the victim is consistent and trustworthy and is sufficient to sustain conviction, and that minor contradictions or delay in lodging the FIR are not fatal in cases of sexual offences. It is further submitted that absence of external injuries or negative FSL findings does not discredit the prosecution case of repeated sexual exploitation on the false promise of marriage. Learned State counsel also argues that the appellant was acquainted with the victim and was aware of her caste status, therefore the provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act have been rightly invoked. Hence, it is prayed that the appeal being devoid of merits deserves to be dismissed. 13. We have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 14. The point for determination before this Court is whether the 8 prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that sexual relations were without consent and offences under IPC and SC/ST Act are made out? 15. Since the conviction of the appellant rests primarily upon the testimony of the victim, we deem it appropriate to carefully scrutinize her evidence in the light of surrounding circumstances, conduct of the parties and other corroborative material available on record. 16. The victim (PW-2), while deposing before the learned trial Court, stated that she was residing on rent in the year 2022 at the house of one Loknath situated at Santoshi Nagar, Raipur. According to her, the appellant had visited the said house for the purpose of installation of a grill, during which she came in contact with him for the first time. She stated that upon being asked by the landlady, she had prepared tea for the appellant and during the course of conversation she informed him that she was in search of employment. The appellant allegedly informed her that he required a female worker and provided her with the address of his shop. 17. She further deposed that after a few days she visited the shop of the appellant situated at Gudhiyari, where she was engaged for work relating to maintaining attendance of labourers and taking orders for steel materials. According to her testimony, during the course of employment, the appellant developed acquaintance with her and suggested that since she was travelling from a distant place, he could arrange a rented accommodation for her near his shop for convenience. 9 She stated that thereafter the appellant arranged a rented house for her near Vidya Jyoti School at Murra Bhatti. 18. With regard to the first alleged incident, the victim stated that on 15.06.2022 she was alone in the shop at about afternoon hours when the appellant arrived, closed the shutter of the shop and established physical relations with her against her will despite her resistance. She further stated that at that time the appellant assured her that he would keep her like his wife and would fulfil her needs. She deposed that thereafter the appellant continued to establish physical relations with her on several occasions. 19. The victim further stated that in the month of May 2023 she realised that she was pregnant. According to her, when she informed the appellant about the pregnancy and insisted upon marriage, the appellant avoided the issue and allegedly administered medicines to her which resulted in bleeding. She stated that thereafter the appellant took her to a private hospital for treatment and again gave her medicines to control the bleeding. 20. She further deposed that on 09.09.2023 the appellant again visited her rented accommodation and established physical relations with her despite her refusal. She stated that subsequently she came to know that the appellant was already married. According to her testimony, the appellant used to threaten and assault her, due to which she did not disclose the incidents to anyone for a considerable period. Ultimately, on 12.09.2023 she submitted a written complaint at Police 10 Station Gudhiyari. 21. During cross-examination, the victim admitted that she had been working at the shop of the appellant for a considerable period and had remained in continuous contact with him. Certain suggestions were put to her regarding existence of a consensual relationship and monetary transactions between the parties, which she denied. She also denied the suggestion that she had introduced herself as the wife of the appellant before medical authorities. It was further suggested that disputes had arisen between them regarding financial matters and that she had threatened to lodge a complaint, which she refuted. 22. However, from her testimony it also emerges that the relationship between the parties continued for a substantial duration extending over more than one year prior to lodging of the complaint. She acknowledged that she did not immediately inform her family members or the police about the alleged incidents. The victim maintained that she remained silent due to fear and hope of marriage. 23. Thus, the evidence of the victim indicates that she had come into contact with the appellant in connection with employment, remained associated with him for a prolonged period and alleged repeated physical relations on the basis of assurance of marriage. At the same time, certain inconsistencies appear in her deposition regarding whether the initial act was forcible or whether the relationship continued on the promise of marriage, which assumes significance while appreciating the question of consent. 11 24. At the outset, it is not in dispute that the victim was a major at the time of the alleged incidents. Her own testimony indicates that she was working independently at the shop of the appellant and was capable of managing her day-to-day affairs. The evidence further reveals that she remained in continuous association with the appellant for a substantial period of more than one year. During this period, she voluntarily visited the workplace of the appellant and resided in rented accommodation which, according to her, had been arranged by him. 25. Such prolonged association between the parties assumes significance while examining the question whether the physical relationship was against the will of the victim or was the result of mutual consent. The conduct attributed to the victim does not prima facie indicate resistance or absence of volition, particularly when no immediate complaint was made either to her family members, acquaintances or to the police authorities. 26. So far as delay in lodging the FIR is concerned, the first alleged incident is stated to have occurred on 15.06.2022 whereas the written complaint was submitted on 12.09.2023. Thus, there is an inordinate delay of approximately one year and three months in setting the criminal law into motion. Although delay in reporting sexual offences is not by itself fatal to the prosecution case, the explanation for such delay must be plausible and convincing. 27. In the present case, the victim has not furnished any satisfactory explanation for remaining silent for such a prolonged period despite 12 alleging repeated sexual exploitation. The fact that the relationship between the parties admittedly continued during this interregnum creates a reasonable doubt regarding the veracity of the allegation that the physical relations were established against her will. 28. Further, on careful reading of the testimony of the victim, it emerges that she has made varying statements regarding the nature of the relationship. At one stage she has alleged that the appellant forcibly established physical relations with her, whereas at another stage she has stated that such relations were established on the promise of marriage. This inconsistency assumes importance because the legal consequences flowing from forcible intercourse and consensual intercourse induced by a promise of marriage are distinct. 29. The evidence on record does not convincingly establish that the alleged promise of marriage was false from the very inception or that it was made solely with the intention to deceive the victim. The prolonged continuation of the relationship and the absence of any contemporaneous protest or complaint weaken the prosecution case in this regard. 30. Now coming to the Medical and Scientific Evidence, the medical examination of the victim does not reveal any external injuries suggestive of forcible sexual intercourse. The medical witness has not given any definite opinion regarding the allegation of rape. The history recorded during medical examination indicates that the victim and the appellant were acquainted for a considerable period and had physical 13 relations on multiple occasions. 31. Similarly, there is no cogent medical or documentary evidence to conclusively establish that the appellant administered abortion pills or caused termination of pregnancy without the consent of the victim. In absence of reliable medical corroboration, it would be unsafe to sustain conviction under Section 313 of the Indian Penal Code. 32. It is well settled that consent implies an act of reason accompanied by deliberation. When a woman is major and capable of understanding the nature and consequences of her actions, her continued participation in a relationship over a substantial period may indicate voluntary consent unless the prosecution establishes circumstances indicating coercion, threat or misconception of fact of such nature as would vitiate consent. 33. In the present case, the victim was admittedly a major and was earning her livelihood independently. Her conduct in maintaining association with the appellant for a long duration without lodging complaint creates a strong possibility that the physical relationship was consensual. The subsequent failure of the relationship or refusal to marry, by itself, cannot convert a consensual relationship into an offence of rape in absence of proof that the promise was deceitful from inception. 34. Now coming to the conviction under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the prosecution has relied upon the caste certificate of the victim to establish that she 14 belonged to a Scheduled Caste. However, mere proof of caste is not sufficient to attract the aggravated provisions of the Act. It must further be established that the alleged offence was committed on the ground that the victim belonged to a Scheduled Caste or with the knowledge and intention contemplated under the statute. 35. In the present case, there is no reliable evidence to demonstrate any nexus between the alleged acts and the caste identity of the victim. The relationship between the parties appears to have arisen out of personal acquaintance and employment and not on account of caste considerations. 36. Criminal jurisprudence mandates that if two views are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the one favourable to the accused must be adopted. The cumulative effect of delay in lodging the FIR, inconsistencies in testimony of the victim, absence of convincing medical corroboration, prolonged consensual association between the parties and lack of proof regarding essential ingredients of the offences alleged creates reasonable doubt in the prosecution case. 37. In such circumstances, it would not be safe to sustain conviction solely on the basis of the testimony of the victim without adequate corroboration. 38. Accordingly, this Court holds that the prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant established sexual relations with the victim without her free consent on false promise of marriage, caused termination of pregnancy without her consent, or 15 committed the alleged acts attracting the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 39. For the foregoing reasons, the criminal appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment and conviction and order of sentence dated 03.07.2025 is set aside. The appellant stands acquitted from all the charges. 40. Keeping in view of the provisions of Section 437-A CrPC (now Section 481 of BNSS), 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 2 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. 41. Let a certified copy of this judgment along with the original record be transmitted to the trial court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Manpreet