State Of Chhattisgarh vs Kaushal Sahu
2022 Latest Caselaw 5112 Chatt

                                    1

                                                                 NAFR


         HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                       CRMP No. 414 of 2020
    State of Chhattisgarh Through- Its Station House Officer,
     Police Station Kurud, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.
                                                      ---- Petitioner
                                  Versus
    Kaushal Sahu S/o Ramesh Sahu Aged About 24 Years R/o
     Village Khudurpani, Police Station Nagari, District Dhamtari,
     Chhattisgarh., District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh
                                                    ---- Respondent

For Petitioner/State : Mr. Raghvendra Verma, G.A. For Respondent : Mr. Nasimuddin Ansari, Adv.

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 10/08/2022

1. Heard on the application for grant of leave to appeal filed

under Section 378 (4) of the Cr.P.C.

2. Learned counsel for appellant/State would submit that in the

present case-specific evidence has been given by the

prosecution which proves that the respondent was trying to

outrage the modesty of the prosecutrix. Prosecutrix clearly

Stated against the respondent, but the learned trial Court did

not appreciate this fact and acquitted the respondent. The

finding of the learned trial Court is perverse and against the

law as well as facts. The learned trial Court has failed to

appreciate the statement of the prosecutrix in its proper

perspective as she has stated before Court that the accused

had stopped her in the midway, caught hold of her hand and

threatened her. The learned trial Court has not justified to the

extended benefit of the doubt in favour of the

respondent/accused, therefore the appeal is liable to be

admitted.

3. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that the

learned trial Court has minutely examined the all evidence

and found that there is a delay of 3 months in lodging the FIR

as the date of FIR is 07.03.2019 whereas the said incident

had taken place on 26.01.2019 and there is no proper

explanation has been given regarding delay in lodging the

FIR. Aunt of the prosecutrix- (PW-1) admitted all suggestions

of the respondent which clearly proves the defence of the

respondent, therefore, the finding of the learned trial Court is

based on proper appreciation of oral and documentary

evidence.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

5. This appeal is filed against the judgment of acquittal dated

29.07.2019 recorded by Special Judge (POCSO), (FTC),

Dhamtari, District- Dhamtari (C.G.) in Special Criminal Case

No. 10/2019 acquitting the respondent of charges punishable

under Sections 354, 506 of the IPC and Section 8 of the

POCSO Act.

6. The learned trial Court has minutely examined the entire

evidence available on record and found that when the father

of the prosecutrix had seen the picture of the prosecutrix with

the respondent then he lodged the FIR through her daughter

against the respondent. The learned trial Court also found

that the PW-1 (Aunt of the prosecutrix) admitted the defence

of the respondent. The view which has been taken by the

learned trial Court appears to be a plausible and possible

view and in the absence of any illegality or perversity in the

view taken by the learned trial Court merely because of

another view is possible, this Court is not inclined to interfere

with the impugned judgment insofar as the acquittal of the

accused/respondent from the charges punishable under

Sections 354, 506 of the IPC and Section 8 of the POCSO Act

is concerned.

7. Accordingly, leave not granted. The petition is dismissed at

motion stage.

Sd/-

(Rajani Dubey) Judge

H.L. Sahu