2026:CGHC:4091 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 648 of 2005 Ghanshyam Kosaria S/o. Rohit Kosaria, Aged about 20 years, Occupation Student, R/o. Village, Chandi, P.S. Abhanpur, District Raipur (CG)

... Appellant(s)

versus State Of Chhattisgarh through District Magistrate, Raipur (CG)

... Respondent(s)

For Appellant (s) : Ms. Vaishali Jeswani, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shailesh Puriya, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas

Order on Board

23/01/2026

1. This criminal appeal under Section 374 (4) of Cr.P.C. has been filed against the judgment dated 30.07.2005 passed by 13^th Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Raipur in Sessions Trial No. 171 of 2005, by which the appellant has been convicted for an offence under Section 363 of IPC and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and a fine of Rs. 200/- under Section 363 IPC.

Digitally signed by SANTOSH SANTOSH KUMAR KUMAR SHARMA SHARMA Date:

2026.02.12 +0530

2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the victim’s step father lodged FIR in Police Station Abhanpur, District Raipur (Ex.P-1) on 08.04.2005 alleging that the appellant took his minor daughter (PW-2) from lawful guardianship of her father without her consent. It is also alleged that on 07.07.2005 at about 2 PM the appellant allured his daughter for marriage, took her to Raipur with his friend and kept her in the house of Sajanu Jangde (PW-8) and thereafter he brought her back to Village Chandi. The police registered the FIR bearing Crime No. 93 of 2005 under Sections 363 and 366 IPC.

The victim was recovered. Statements of the witnesses were recorded.

3. After completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed before the Court of Judicial Magistrate Fist Class, Raipur, who in turn committed the case to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur which was registered as Sessions Case No. 171 of 2005.

4. The prosecution in order to prove the guilt of the appellant examined 12 witnesses, Mehtaru Kosaria (PW-1), victim (PW-2), Ramkumar (Pw-3), Ku. Devanti Tandon (PW-4), Budhiman (PW-5), Santosh Kumar Baghel (PW- 6), Taman Lal Kurre (PW-7), Sanjnu Jangade (PW-8), Makhanlal Banjare (PW-9), Sub Inspector R.P. Shukla (PW-10), Domar Tandon (PW-11), constable Prafull Kumar Panda (PW-12), Inspector K.B. Dwivedi (PW-13) and exhibited the documents FIR (Ex. P-1), seizure memo (Ex.P-2), statements of witnesses (Ex.P-3 to Ex.P-5), Map (Ex.P-6), arrest memo (Ex.P-7), Statement (Ex.P-8), birth Register (Ex.P-9).

5. Statement of the accused/appellant was recorded under Section 313 CRPC in which he denied the allegation made against him and pleaded his innocence and false implication in the case. The appellant has stated that the dispute arose between Mehatru and his father, as such she has implicated him in the instant case and exhibited document Ex.D-1 in his support.

6. After hearing the parties, learned trial Court on the basis of material on record and upon considering the statements of the witnesses has passed the judgment of conviction and order of sentence against the appellant as mentioned in above.

7. Counsel for the appellant would submit that the finding recorded by the trial Court is contrary to the evidence, material on record as the statements of the victim has not been taken into consideration in its true prospect. She would further submit that during pendecy of the appeal, the appellant and the victim have solemnized marriage long 18 years back and blessed with 5 children. She has further submitted that the appellant and the victim after marriage living peacefully and the appellant remained in custody from 11.04.2005 to 15.04.2005, therefore, looking to his conduct and his overt- act, his sentence may be reduced to the period, which he has already undergone in the custody. She would further submit that if the appellant has to undergo remaining sentence as awarded by the trail Court it may ruin the family as he is only the bread earner. She would further submit that this i