Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ajay Ratan Choudhary @ Lulli Satnami vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 November, 2025
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:59210
1 CRA-1282-2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAMKUMAR CHOUBEY
ON THE 17th OF NOVEMBER, 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1282 of 2023
AJAY RATAN CHOUDHARY @ LULLI SATNAMI
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Uday Raj Mishra, Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Manas Mani Verma, Govt. Advocate for the respondent-State.
JUDGMENT
Per: Justice Vivek Agarwal
This appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure is
filed by the appellant-Ajay Ratan Choudhary @ Lulli Satnami, being
aggrieved of the judgment dated 24.12.2022, passed by the learned Special
Judge, POCSO Act, Satna, District Satna (M.P.), in Special Case
No.33/2021, whereby the learned trial Court has convicted the appelant-Ajay
Raan Choudhary @ Lulli Satnami for offence under Section 376AB of IPC
and Section 5(M) read with Section 6 of POCSO Act, for which he has been
sentenced to undergo R.I. for 20 years and fine of Rs.5,000/-, with default
stipulation of 06 months R.I.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is
innocent.
3. As per the prosecution story, complainant Victim, who was aged
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:59210
2 CRA-1282-2023
about five years at the time of incident was left by her mother PW/3 on
10.07.2021 between 3:00 to 4:00 P.M., for Corona vaccination. Victim
(PW/2), was left at their door and when she returned after one hour, then she
found that victim was sitting near the 'Chabutra' of her house and started
crying. Her eyes were swollen. Mother of the victim had taken the victim
inside and asked as to what was the reason for she being upset, then she
stated that Lulli Chachu had dragged her inside a room and after undressing,
he had taken down his pant and fingered her vagina. When she started
crying, then he had given a packet of biscuit to eat and was trying to violate
her privacy. Thereafter, appellant had lied on the body of the victim and had
discharged.
4. Victim's mother (PW/3) visited Police Station Kolgawan, District
Satna and had given a written complaint Ex.P/2, on the basis of which FIR
(Ex.P/3) was lodged registering case Crime No.844/2021 under Sections
376(2)(cha), 376(2)(i)(jha), 376(2)(j), 376(2)(n)(dha) 34 IPC and Section 5
& 6 of POCSO Act.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that though allegation
was made against two accused persons, but DNA report of the present
appellant, namely, Ajay Ratna Satnami is positive. According to the DNA
report Ex.C/1, it is mentioned that 'Salwar' samples 1 & 2 of the Victim
(Ex.B), revealed DNA profile which matches with the blood sample of
appellant (Ex.G). It is pointed out that false accusation was made, inasmuch
as, DNA profile of another co-accused Ajay Bahadur Satnami was different
from the DNA profile obtained from the 'Salwar' of the victim.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:59210
3 CRA-1282-2023
6. Thus, it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that
conviction and sentence of the appellant is too harsh and disproportionate.
7. Shri Manas Mani Verma, learned Govt. Advocate for the
respondent-State, in his turn, submits that Dr. Sarita Singh (PW/1), had
examined the victim on 13.07.2021 vide her MLC report Ex.P/1, in which on
examination, it was found that secondary sexual characters were not
developed. A scratch mark was present over chest measuring 2-3 cm. Vulva
was red inflamed, hymen tier was present at 6 O'clock position. Two slides
were prepared from vagina, packed, sealed and handed over to police.
Doctor opined that exact opinion regarding intercourse cannot be given.
Opinion given after slides investigation and undergarments report. On
internal examination, she found that hymen was ruptured.
8. Thus, it is submitted that MLC report Ex.P/1 being corroborated
with DNA report Ex.C/1, no leniency is called for.
9. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the
record, it is evident that Dr. Sarita Singh (PW/1), admitted in her cross-
examination that it is not mentioned that vaginal parts and clothings of the
victim were soaked with blood or not. She stated that she had only
mentioned that there was redness and inflammation in vulva which can be
because of fingering. She admitted that she cannot state as to whether any
semen was found on the private parts and the outer parts of the victim or not.
10. PW/2 is the victim. She has supported prosecution case and stated
that not only her privacy was violated but first inserting a finger, then trying
to violate her privacy and then committing oral sex, but in cross-examination
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:59210
4 CRA-1282-2023
a suggestion was given that since parents of Ajay are residing with him,
therefore, he could not have committed said offence, but victim had denied
this suggestion and she categorically stated that mother of Ajay had gone for
cutting of gross, whereas, his father was out of home in relation to some
work. Victim categorically stated in para 6 of her cross-examination that
appellant had dragged her and had not lifted her. While she was being
dragged, she had sustained injuries on her neck. She has denied other
suggestions given by the accused person.
11. PW/3 mother of the victim supported the victim's case so also
father of the victim.
12. When evidence which has come on record is taken into
consideration, then firstly most important evidence is of lady doctor Dr.
Sarita Singh (PW/1), who has asked for corroboration of her MLC finding as
contained in Ex.P/1 with a Medico Legal Report. In DNA finger printing
unit report Ex.C/1 from the 'Salwar' of the victim, semen of the appellant was
found. Doctor has medically corroborated swelling and inflammtion in her
volva. She has also medically corroborated recent rupture of hymen at 6
O'clock position.
13. When these facts are taken into consideration, then in the light of
the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in Sunil Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
[(2017) 4 SCC 393], it is held that "though a positive result of DNA test
would constitute clinching evidence against accused, if however, result of
test is in the negative i.e. favouring accused or if DNA profiling had not been
done or proved in a given case, weight or other materials and evidence on
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:59210
5 CRA-1282-2023
record will still have to be considered."
14. In the present case, when medical evidence is taken into
consideration along with the DNA report Ex.C/1, then as per the definition
of penetrative sexual assault given in Section 3(b), even if it is presumed for
a minute that appellant had not committed any intercourse yet inserting to
any extent of any object or a part of the body, not being the penis, into the
vagina, the urethra or anus of the child or makes the child to do so with him
or any other person will fall within the definition of penetrative sexual
assault; and that being the fact and prosecution having proved that age of the
victim was less than 12 years, as proved by Dr. Shalendra Swarnkar (PW/7),
Registrar of Birth and Death, who proved the date of birth of the victim to be
02.06.2016, she being less than 12 years, conviction under Section 5(M) read
with Section 6 of POCSO Act cannot be faulted with. Therefore, there being
no scope for interference in the impugned judgment which has been passed
after proper appreciation of evidence on record, appeal fails and is dismissed.
Record be sent back.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) (RAMKUMAR CHOUBEY)
JUDGE JUDGE
A.Praj.
