2026:CGHC:5626-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 325 of 2026 State of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station- Kansabel, District-

Jashpur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s)

MANPREET KAUR versus Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2026.02.02 16:19:48 +0530 Ratandeep Ekka S/o Hermon Ekka Aged About 20 Years R/o Village-

Bhusaditoli, Police Station- Duldula, District- Jashpur (C.G.)

... Respondent(s)

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.S. Baghel, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge

Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice

02.02.2026

1. Heard Mr. S.S. Baghel, learned Government Advocate for the appellant/State on I.A. No.01 of 2026, which is an application for condonation of delay of 217 days.

2. From perusal of the records as well as submissions of the State counsel, it transpires that the petition is barred by 73 days and the State as well as Registry wrongly calculated the delay.

3. The State/appellant has preferred the instant application for grant of leave to appeal and appeal against the findings and judgment of acquittal dated 02.09.2025, passed in Special POCSO Case No. 09/2025, by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Jashpur, District- Jashpur (C.G.) whereby acquitting the respondent from the offence punishable under under Sections 363, 366, 376 of the IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act in connection with Crime No. 11/2025 at Police Station- Dokda, Police Station- Kansabel, District- Jashpur (C.G.).

4. Learned counsel for the appellant / State submits that though the scope of interference with an order of acquittal is limited, the appellate Court nonetheless possesses wide powers of re- appreciation of evidence, and where such reappraisal reveals that the findings of acquittal are unjust, perverse or against the weight of evidence, the appellate Court is fully empowered to reverse the same. Learned State counsel submits that the impugned judgment passed by the learned Trial Court is patently erroneous, perverse, and contrary to the settled principles of law. Despite there being ample, cogent, and reliable evidence available on record establishing the guilt of the accused/respondent, the learned Trial Court has erroneously acquitted him on wholly insignificant, unreasonable, and legally unsustainable grounds. The learned trial Court has failed to appreciate the prosecution evidence in its correct perspective, which clearly establishes the involvement of the respondents in the commission of the alleged offence. The age of the victim stood proved beyond reasonable doubt through the seizure of the admission and date of birth registers vide Ex.P-19 by PW-04, duly supported by PW-02 (father of the victim) and proved by PW-06, the In-charge Head Master, yet the learned trial Court committed a grave error in holding that the victim was not a minor. The victim remained consistent throughout and her testimony was fully corroborated by PW-02, PW-07 and the medical and FSL evidence (Ex.P-07). There was no justification to disbelieve such cogent and reliable evidence. The findings of acquittal are based on minor, imaginary and irrelevant discrepancies, ignoring material evidence, thereby resulting in grave miscarriage of justice, as the evidence on record is clear, consistent and sufficient to prove the guilt of the respondents beyond any reasonable doubt.

5. It has been contended that the State, after obtaining necessary documents and information with respect to the case preferred the present petition, however, some delay was occurred due to fulfillment of various departmental formalities and working of the Government machinery because the State Government is a multi functioning body, hence, at times the fulfillment of departmental formalities takes unexpected long time. Therefore, in some cases the State is prevented from filing the case within the prescribed period of limitation, which is bonafide and not deliberate. The instant appeal is, therefor