Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CHH) 2379
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi, J
Dinesh Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
CRA No. 1132 of 2022
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Rahil Arun Kochar
For the Respondents: Mr. Vivek Sharma
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Sexual Offences
Act Referred
Indian Penal Code : S.377,S.511,S.294,S.506
Code of Criminal Procedure : S.161,S.313
Headnote
(B) Evidence - Credibility - Discrepancies in witness statements regarding the overt act do not negate the victim’s account of sexual intent and actions by the appellant. (Paras 14-16)
Facts of the case:
The appellant was accused of attempting to commit sexual acts on an 11-year-old boy during a wedding procession. The victim and his family reported the incident, leading to the appellant's arrest and trial. (Paras 2-5)
Findings of Court:
The court found the trial court's conviction under Sections 377/511 IPC and Section 4/18 POCSO Act erroneous; the correct conviction was for sexual assault under Sections 7/8 of the POCSO Act. (Paras 17-19)
Issues: The primary issues included whether the appellant's actions constituted penetrative sexual assault versus sexual assault, and the credibility of witness testimonies. (Paras 16-18)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the evidence supported a conviction for sexual assault under the POCSO Act, emphasizing the need for accurate assessment of the crime's nature based on the victim's testimony and the surrounding circumstances. (Paras 17-19)
Result: The appeal is partly allowed, convicting the appellant under Section 7/8 of the POCSO Act with a modified sentence. (Paras 21-22)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the case and initial convictions. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. details of evidence and trial proceedings. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. arguments presented by the appellant and state. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. court's analysis of witness testimonies. (Para 8 , 14) |
| 5. victim's account and corroborating witness statements. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 6. defense witness statement and its relevance. (Para 15) |
| 7. court's findings on conviction and legality. (Para 16 , 18) |
| 8. modification of conviction and sentencing. (Para 17 , 19) |
| 9. conclusion of the appeal and directions. (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
CAV JUDGMENT
1. This criminal appeal has been preferred against judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 03.6.2022 passed by Upper Sessions Judge, First Fast Track Court, Special Judge, under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short ‘POCSO Act’), Durg Distt. Durg (CG) in Special Session Trial (POCSO) No.20/2019, whereby the learned Special Judge, after holding the appellant guilty, convicted and sentenced him in the following manner:-
| Sl. No. | Conviction under Section | Jail Sentence | Fine Sentence | Default stipulation |
| 01. | 377/511 IPC | RI for 05 years | Rs. 500/- | RI for 01 month |
| 02. | 506B IPC | RI for 06 months | Rs.100/- | RI for 01 month |
| 03. | 4/18 of the POCSO Act | RI for 05 years | Rs.2000/- | RI for 01 month |
| All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. |
2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, the complainant, who is mother of the victim boy, aged about 11 years, filed written report on 28-1- 2019 at Police Chowki Vaishali Nagar, PS Supela, District Durg to the effect that, on 27-1-2019 she went to Laxmi Nagar to attend a family wedding with her husband and two children. At around 11:30 pm, on the way when the marriage procession was reaching near Ramnagar, a person named Dinesh (appellant/accused), taking advantage of the crowd of the wedding procession, was trying to commit a criminal act on her younger child/victim. The accused threatened to kill the victim, when the victim told that he will disclose this fact to his parents. Based on the above written complaint (Ex. P-3), FIR (Ex. P-4) was registered for offence under Section 11(i)/12 of POCSO Act against the appellant/ accused. Statements of the complainant and witnesses were recorded. Statement of victim under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. (Ex. P-1) was recorded before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Durg. Spot maps Ex. P-5 and Ex. P-6 were prepared by the Police and the Patwari respectively. Birth certificate (Ex. P-9-C) of victim was seized vide seizure memo Ex. P-8. Victim was got examined by the doctor. Appellant/accused was arrested vide arrest memo (Ex-P-7). Dakhil Kharij register (Ex. P-16-C) was seized vide seizure memo (Ex. P-12). After usual investigation, charge sheet under Section 294 , 506 of the IPC and Section 11(i)/12 of the POCSO Act was filed before the Special Judge.
3. Learned Special Judge framed charges under Section 377/511 , 294 (two times) and Section 506 part II of the IPC and Section 4/18 of the POCSO Act , which were read over and explained to the appellant/accused, who denied the charges and claimed trial.
4. In order to bring home the guilt of the appellant/accused, the prosecution has examined as many as 07 witnesses and exhibited 15 documents. After completion of prosecution evidence, examination of appellant/accused under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. was recorded, in which he pleaded his innocence and false implication. He examined one witness namely, Smt. Phulmati Yadav (DW-1), who is his wife.
5. The trial Court upon appreciation of oral and documentary evidence available on record, by its judgment dated 3-6-2022, finding evidence adduced by the prosecution trustworthy, convicted and sentenced the appellant/accused as mentioned in the opening paragraph, against which, this appeal has been filed by him.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is not disputing the proven fact that at the time of the incident, the victim boy w
