Madhya Pradesh High Court
Braj Kishore Kewat vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 June, 2025
Author: Anand Pathak
Bench: Achal Kumar Paliwal, Anand Pathak
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25947
1 CRA-2364-2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL
ON THE 17th OF JUNE, 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2364 of 2023
BRAJ KISHORE KEWAT
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Aman Dawra - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri SP Chadar, Govt. Advocate for the State.
ORDER
This criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 374
(2) of the Cr.P.C. against the judgement dated 20.10.2022 passed by
Additional Sessions Judge, Berasiya District Bhopal in Special Case
No.52/2021 (State Vs. Braj Kishore), whereby appellant has been convicted
under Section 376(1) of IPC and Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act and has been
sentenced under Section 376(1) of IPC with RI for ten years with fine of
Rs.5,000/- with default stipulation.
2. Prosecution story, in brief, is that on 7.2.2021 at about 8:00 AM in
the morning, appellant kidnapped minor prosecutrix and prosecutrix was
kidnapped knowing that she is likely to be forced to illicit intercourse. On
7.2.2021 appellant repeatedly established physical relation with prosecutrix
against her will and without her consent and committed aggravated
penetrated sexual assault on minor prosecutrix.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25947
2 CRA-2364-2023
3. Learned counsel for the appellant, after referring to testimonies of
the prosecutrix and her parents, submits that they have turned hostile and
they did not support prosecution story. It is also urged that learned trial Court
has wrongly relied upon on DNA report, whereas the same was neither
exhibited nor any questions were asked during appellant's examination under
Section 313 of Cr.P.C. It is also urged that from evidence on record, it is not
established at all that at the time of incident, prosecutrix was minor.
Therefore, learned trial Court has wrongly convicted and sentenced the
appellant. Therefore, appeal be allowed and appellant be acquitted of offence
under Section 376(1) of IPC and Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent/State submits that prosecution
has proved its case by leading cogent evidence and has proved guilty of the
appellant beyond reasonable doubt and there are no grounds to interfere with
the same. Learned trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the
appellant, as above, hence, appeal is liable to be dismissed.
5. Heard and perused the record of the case.
Analysis and findings:-
6. So far as appellant's conviction under Section 376(1) of IPC and
Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act is concerned, perusal of testimony of the
prosecutrix reveals that she has clearly stated in her testimony that she does
not know appellant Braj Kishore and at alleged time, she left her house on
her own and had gone to Bhopal without informing any family members. On
account of aforesaid, her mother had lodged a report. The prosecutrix was
declared hostile and was examined by the prosecution. Prosecutrix has
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25947
3 CRA-2364-2023
clearly stated in her examination-in-chief that it is not correct that she had
gone to Indore with accused and she has clearly denied that appellant
committed rape upon her. She has also denied that appellant had taken her to
Indore on false pretext of marriage. Thus, prosecutrix has denied whole of
the prosecution story. Similarly, prosecutrix's mother (PW-2) and father
(PW-3) have also turned hostile and they did not support the prosecution
story.
7. Thus, there is no oral evidence on record to connect present
appellant with instant offence.
8. So far as DNA report is concerned, though DNA report is on
record, but the same has not been exhibited by the learned trial Court and no
question pertaining to DNA report has been put to appellant during
appellant's examination under Section 313 of Cr.P.C.
9. In view of the aforesaid, appellant cannot be convicted and
sentenced relying upon the said DNA report. Therefore, learned trial Court
has wrongly convicted and sentenced the appellant relying upon the DNA
report.
10. Hence, in view of the discussion in the foregoing paras, learned
trial Court has materially erred in convicting and sentenced the appellant
under Section 376(1) of IPC and Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act.
Resultantly, present criminal appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment
passed by the trial Court is set aside. The appellant is acquitted of offence
under Section 376(1) of IPC and Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act.
11. Accordingly, criminal appeal stands allowed and disposed off.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25947
4 CRA-2364-2023
12. At present appellant is in jail, hence it is directed that present
appellant be released forthwith, if not required in any other case.
12. A copy of this judgment be sent to concerned jail and trial
Court for information and necessary compliance.
13. Record of the trial Court be sent back.
(ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL)
JUDGE
Ansari
