[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ramcharan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 February, 2026
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:13343
1 CRA-10952-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RATNESH CHANDRA SINGH BISEN
ON THE 16th OF FEBRUARY, 2026
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 10952 of 2024
RAMCHARAN
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
None for the parties.
ORDER
Per: Justice Vivek Agarwal
Lawyers are abstaining from the work.
Perused the record.
This criminal appeal is filed by the appellant being aggrieved of the
judgment dated 12th September, 2024 passed by the learned Special Judge,
POCSO Act, Tikamgarh (MP) in S.C. No.64/2021 whereby the learned trial
Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant as under :
Conviction Sentence
Imprisonment in
Section Act Imprisonment Fine
lieu of fine
363 I.P.C. R.I. for 03 years Rs.500/- R.I for 01 month.
366 I.P.C. R.I. for 06 years Rs.1,000/- R.I. for 02 months
3/4(2) I.P.C. R.I. for 10 years Rs.2,000/- R.I. for 04 months
5(l)/6 POCSO R.I. for 20 years Rs.2,000/- R.I. for 04 months
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:13343
2 CRA-10952-2024
2. The basic foundation for conviction is the DNA report (Ex.P/18)
which reveals that STR DNA Profile obtained from panty of the victim
matches with the 'Y' STR DNA Profile obtained from the blood sample of
the appellant. Thus, treating the victim to be a minor, conviction has been
recorded.
3. Perused the record.
4. Victim (PW-1) admitted that accused is known to her. She was
talking to the accused as he had visited her village to lay down the water
pipeline. This witness admitted that when she had gone to Katila village,
she did not inform anybody about her abduction or violation of privacy and
she also did not inform anybody in the school that she was being teased by
the accused. This witness also admitted that as to how she had reached
village temple at Village Katila, cannot be said by her. This witness
deposed that while travelling from her village to the village of the accused,
she had passed through Prithvipur. She did not lodge any report to
anybody. This witness also admitted that they had gone to Shankerjee
Temple. This witness deposed that her elder sister, after marriage, is having
one child aged about one year. This witness admitted that she has no
information as to whether her age is above 18 or not. Thus, it appears that
since victim's elder sister who is one year elder to her, was married at least
two years prior because she, admittedly, has one year old child, victim was
major.
5. Father of the victim (PW-2) admitted that he does not know as to
when his marriage was performed, but, after one year of marriage, eldest
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:13343
3 CRA-10952-2024
child was born and after another one year victim was born. Mother of the
victim (PW-3) in para-8 deposed that her marriage was performed 30 years
back. Her eldest child was born five or six years thereafter, who is already
married. After one year of birth of eldest child, victim was born. This
witness admitted that her father-in-law admitted the victim in the school,
however, her father-in-law has not been examined in the Court.
6. Shiv Kumar Rawat (PW-4), school teacher, deposed that there is no
documentary evidence in regard to the date of birth of the victim. This
witness also admitted overwriting in the scholar register at the certain point
of places.
7. Lady doctor i.e. Dr. Shalu Johri (PW-5) deposed that there were no
external and internal injury marks on the body of the victim. On internal
examination, she found labia majora and labia minora to be fully developed.
8. It appears that victim was a consenting adult. There is a tacit
admission that she had gone on her own to the village of the appellant to
perform marriage with him. In her statement recorded under Section 164 of
Cr.P.C. contained in Ex.P/2, victim admitted that on 22/01/2021 she had ran
away with appellant-Ramcharan Kushwaha to Village Katila. Ramcharan
was visiting her neighbourhood. Whenever he used to pass through her
house, he used to joke with her. Victim admitted that she was talking to
Ramcharan for last 3-4 months. She was talking to Ramcharan on mobile
phone. She admitted that she proposed Ramcharan to marry her. When he
had accepted the proposal, upon her request, Ramcharan had visited her
house to meet her where victim stated that her parents will not marry her to
Ramcharan, therefore, they decided to marry.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:13343
4 CRA-10952-2024
9. In a tempo victim had gone to village Katila. When she left her
home, that time her parents were filling water from the well whereas her
younger brother was playing. They reached Village Katila in about two
hours where she had performed marriage with Ramcharan at a Shiv Temple.
Thereafter they had hired a room at Katila and started living as husband and
wife and established physical relationship. Victim stated in her statement
recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. that even then also she wanted to live
with Ramcharan and she had gone on her own volition with Ramcharan
without informing her parents.
10. This statement yet corroborated from the Court statement of the
victim where after taking a 'U' turn, she has not supported the prosecution
case and has tacitly admitted her affection towards Ramcharan and also it is
evident from the evidence of victim, who deposed that her elder sister has a
child of about one year, she does not know the date of birth of her elder
sister and when father and mother, both, unequivocally admitted that after
one year of birth of the eldest daughter, victim was born, it is evident that
victim was a consenting adult. Thus, when these facts are taken into
consideration, conviction of the appellant under the aforesaid Sections of the
Indian Penal Code as well as POCSO Act cannot be sustained in the eyes of
law.
11. Accordingly, this criminal appeal filed by the appellant is allowed.
Impugned judgment dated 12th September, 2024 passed in S.C. No.64/2021
by Special Judge, POCSO Act, Tikamgarh (MP) is hereby set aside and the
appellant is acquitted from all the charges. Appellant be released forthwith, if
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:13343
5 CRA-10952-2024
not required in any other case. Record of the trial Court be sent back
immediately. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) (RATNESH CHANDRA SINGH BISEN)
JUDGE JUDGE
ts
