Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 9341

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Bibhu Datta Guru, J
Vivek Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
CRA No. 439 of 2016

Advocates:
For the Appellant: Mr. Alok Kumar Dewangan
For the Respondents: Mr. Shailendra Sharma, P.L.

Insufficient evidence linked the appellant to the crime, resulting in acquittal based on the principle of benefit of the doubt in circumstantial cases.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 354

(C) and 354

(D) - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Sections 12 and 14(10) - Information regarding obscene video circulating and allegations of following the prosecutrix - Conviction based on circumstantial evidence - Acquittal due to insufficient evidence linking the appellant to the crime. (Paras 1, 18)

(B) Criminal Procedure Code - Section 374(2) - Appeal against conviction - Assessing the standard of evidence necessary for conviction - Burden of proof lies on the prosecution which was not met in the present case. (Paras 18, 19)

Facts of the case:
The appellant was accused of taking and circulating obscene photographs of the prosecutrix, a neighbor, over a span of four years, leading to his conviction and sentencing by the trial court. Insufficient evidence was cited, particularly lack of concrete links to the appellant and the alleged digital evidence.

Findings of Court:
Insufficient evidence presented by the prosecution resulted in the appellant being entitled to benefit of the doubt, leading to acquittal. The crucial evidence linking the appellant with the crime was missing.

Issues: Whether the evidence presented conclusively proved that the appellant recorded or issued the obscene material, as this proof was necessary for a conviction.

Ratio Decidendi: The court established that a lack of direct evidence connecting the appellant to the obscene recordings and circumstantial nature of the evidence led to reasonable doubt regarding guilt.

Result: The appellant is acquitted of the charges for which he was tried.

Table of Content
1. overview of the case details and charges. (Para 2 , 5)
2. arguments regarding evidence and conviction. (Para 6 , 7)
3. discussion on circumstantial evidence and defense. (Para 8 , 9 , 19)
4. final decision regarding acquittal. (Para 20)

Order on Board

23/07/2025

1. This criminal appeal preferred under Section 374 (2) of the Cr.P.C is against impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 11.03.2016 passed in Sessions Trial No. 23/2015 by the learned upper Sessions Judge, Bemetara C.G. whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:-

Conviction	Sentence
U/s 354 (C) of the IPC	R. I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine to further

	undergo RI for 1 month.
U/s 354 (d) of I.P.C.	R.I. for one year and fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of fine amount additional R.I. for one month
U/S 12 & 14 (10 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act , 2012	R.I. for 1-1 year and fine of Rs. 500-500/- in default of payment of fine amount additional R.I. for 1-1 month
U/s 67 of I.T Act	R.I. for one year and fine of Rs. 5000/- in default of payment of fine amount additional S.I. for 3 months.

(All the sentences were directed to run concurrently)

2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that a report was lodged on

24.09.2014 that both appellant and prosecutrix are neighbour and since last four years, the appellant used to follow her and took porn photograph of the prosecutrix in his mobile phone and circulate to others.

3. During investigation, Spot Map was prepared. Subsequently, after completing the investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted before the Court. After framing the charges against the accused/appellant, the charges were read out and explained to the appellant, he denied committing the crime and demanded trial.

4. In order to bring home the offence, the prosecution has examined

11 witnesses in its support. Statement of the accused/appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C was recorded, wherein he has pleaded his innocence and false implication in the matter.

5. The trial Court after appreciating oral and documentary evidence available on record, by its judgment dated 11.03.2016 convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned in paragraph one of this judgment. Hence, this appeal.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has falsely been implicated in crime in question and he has been convicted by recording a finding which is perverse to the record. He would submit that there is no evidence that obscene images of the prosecutrix was taken and forwarded by the present appellant. He also submits that there is no evidence to prove that the seized mobile phone belongs to the appellant and therefore prays that the present appeal be allowed and the appellant be acquitted of the charges.

7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the submission of the appellant and submits that the conviction of the appellant is well merited which does not call for any interference.

8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions made herein-above and also went through the record with utmost circumspection.

9. The question for consideration is whether the accused took pictures of the accused in a situation of privacy where she was not likely to be seen by anyone else and circulated them in electronic media to another person’s mobile phone?

10. PW-1 namely Mamta Mishra stated in her examination in chief that she knew the prosecutrix and on 22.09.2014, she saw the nude picture of her in the mobile phone of her husband and told the mother of the prosecutrix and thereafter they lodged the report. He further stated that the mobile phone was seized. Further in her cross examination she has stated that she don’t use mobile phone and does not have the knowledge that if something is send to the mobile phone, the sender is known. She further stated that she and her husband are not educated and do not k

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 9341

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPURBibhu Datta Guru, JVivek Singh – AppellantVersusState Of Chhattisgarh – RespondentCRA No. 439 of 2016

Insufficient evidence linked the appellant to the crime, resulting in acquittal based on the principle of benefit of the doubt in circumstantial cases.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Bibhu Datta Guru, J
Vivek Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
CRA No. 439 of 2016