The court affirmed that acquittal judgments should not be overturned by appellate courts unless the prosecution presents substantial evidence undermining the acquittal.

SB : Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Judgment on Board

31.07.2025

1. This Acquittal Appeal under Section 378 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) has been preferred by the State against the judgment of acquittal dated 07.09.2017 passed by the Special Judge (POCSO Act), Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (CG) in Special Criminal Case No.15/2015, whereby, the accused/appellant was acquitted of the charge under Sections 363 & 366 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short the "POCSO Act").

2. Prosecution case, in brief, is that the respondent/accused on 13.11.2013 at Village AB which comes under the jurisdiction of Police Station Balod, District Janjgir, abducted the minor prosecutrix from her lawful guardianship with an intent to compel her to marry against her wishes and to developed illicit relationship and also committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault with the prosecutrix. It is further case of the prosecution that the prosecutrix (PW-10) lodged an FIR on 22.11.2014 at Police Station Pantora stating that the respondent/accused is engaged in driving of vehicle used in road construction. Prior to 8 months from 22.11.2014 the respondent came to her house and they had made love relationship with each other. Thereafter, the respondent allured her on the pretext of marriage and took her to his house without consent of her parents. He kept her in his house at Village P for about one and a half months and also made physical relation several times. But, on 21.11.2014 the respondent ousted her from his house. Thereafter, on the advise of her family members and others, she has lodged complaint before the Police Station and numbered FIR was registered on

23.11.2014.

3. Crime details form was prepared. The victim was medically examined by Dr. MJ (PW-1), who submitted the medical report vide Ex.P-1, opining that no external or internal injury was found on the body of the victim and the victim is accustomed for sexual intercourse. The respondent/accused was also examined by Dr. UKT (PW-7) who submitted his medical report vide Ex.P-8 opining that the accused is capable to perform sexual intercourse. Dakhil Khirj register was also seized in which date of birth of the victim was recorded as 29.07.1998. After recording the statement of the witnesses, charge-sheet was filed against the respondent/accused for the offences mentioned above.

4. In the statement recorded under Section 313 CrPC the respondent/accused pleaded false implication and claimed to be tried.

During trial the prosecution has examined as many as 10 witnesses.

5. After evaluating the evidence on record the trial Court acquitted the respondent/accused of all the charges levelled against him. Being aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal, the State has preferred the instant appeal.

6. Learned State counsel submits that the trial Court has not appreciated the facts and evidence in proper perspective, therefore, the judgment of acquittal deserves to be set-aside.

7. Heard learned counsel for the appellant/State and perused material available on record.

8. In the present case, the prosecutrix (PW-10), who is prime witness, has not supported the case of the prosecution and turned hostile. At Para 2 of the deposition, she clearly stated that due to some dispute with her parents, she fled away from home and went to her aunt's house at Uttar Pradesh, and after some days, she returned to Raipur. In the examination- in-chief, she has not narrated anything agai