2026:CGHC:6183-DB Digitally signed by NAFR ANURADHA ANURADHA TIWARI TIWARI Date:

2026.02.04 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

16:19:42 +0530 CRA No. 981 of 2024 Moneshwar Alias Rinku Katlam S/o Shyam Lal Katlam Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Fakirtola, Andi, Police Station - Bortalab, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

... Appellant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Bortalab, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

... Respondent (Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

For Appellant : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

04.02.2026

1 Heard Mr. Sanjay Kumar Yadav, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State/respondent.

2 Today, though the criminal appeal has been listed for hearing on I.A. No.01, application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant, however, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the appeal is heard finally.

3 Accordingly, I.A. No.01, application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant, stands disposed of.

4 This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.12.2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh in Special Sessions Case No.09/2022 whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “IPC”) as well as Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, ‘POCSO Act’) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 02 years and fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment for 03 months, rigorous imprisonment for 03 years and fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment for 03 months and rigorous imprisonment for 20 years and fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment for 06 months, respectively and it was further directed to run all the sentences concurrently.

5 Learned State counsel submits that notice issued to the father of the prosecutrix/victim (PW-2) has been served, but none has appeared on behalf of the prosecutrix/victim to contest the present appeal.

6 The prosecution case, in brief, is that the father of the victim lodged a written complaint at Police Station Boratalab stating that he is running a salon shop at Dongargarh. On 27.04.2022 at about 03:00 p.m., his minor daughter, aged about 15 years, left the house without informing any family member and thereafter went missing. Initially, the family members presumed that she might have gone somewhere nearby; however, when she did not return even after 1–2 hours, they made a search in the vicinity and the village, but in vain. Having failed to trace her whereabouts, the complainant suspected that some unknown person had enticed and taken away his daughter. On the basis of the said report, Crime No. 31/2022 was registered for the offence punishable under Section 363 of the IPC against an unknown person and investigation was set into motion.

7 During the course of investigation, it came to light that the accused, namely Moneshwar @ Rinku, had taken the victim to Hyderabad. Subsequently, both the victim and the accused were recovered from Hyderabad. Statements of the prosecution witnesses as well as the victim were recorded. On the basis of the statement of the victim, offences under Sections 366 and 376(2) (d) of the IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act were additionally registered. The accused was arrested, necessary seizures were effected, and the medical examination of both the victim and the accused was conducted. After completion of the investigation, the charge-shee