2026:CGHC:3776-DB Digitally signed by RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 299 of 2017 State of Chhattisgarh, through Station House Officer, Police Station Pamgarh, District Janjgir Champa (C.G.)

... Appellant Versus Saadhram S/o Dashrath Kashyap, aged about 20 years, R/o Village- Khaira, Police Station Pamgarh, District Janjgir- Champa, (C.G.)

... Respondent For State/Appellant : Ms. Nandkumari Kashyap, P.L.

For Respondent : Mr. Sahil Sahu, Advocate on behalf of Mr.

Ravindra Sharma, Advocate.

Hon’ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey, J.

Hon’ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal, J.

Judgment on Board Per , Rajani Dubey, J.

22/01/2026

1. This acquittal appeal has been preferred by the State/appellant against the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 27.06.2017 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C), District-Janjgir Champa (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No. 42/2016, whereby the accused/respondent has been acquitted of the charge under Sections 363, 366 and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 in alternate Section 376 of IPC. Hence, this appeal.

2. Brief facts of the case as adumbrated are that on 24.07.2016 at about

10.00 pm, the complainant after completion of his dinner was sleeping at home with his family, At that time, his middle daughter, the prosecutrix/victim aged about 16 years was also sleeping on a separate cot in the same room. When the complainant woke up at 5:00 am, he saw that his daughter/prosecutrix was not at home and he understood that some individual enticed the minor and unlawfully removed her from her guardian's custody. As such, the complainant reported the incident to the concerned police station and on the basis of the written complaint, the crime was found to have occurred and hence the crime was registered and the matter was taken up for investigation. During the investigation, it was found that the accused Sadharam Kashyap lured the prosecutrix along with co-accused/juvenile on juvenile’s motorcycle and took her away with him to Bilaspur. Before this, in the year 2014, the accused/respondent kept sexually exploiting the prosecutrix/victim by alluring her on the pretext of marriage. Thereafter, it was found that the accused/respondent Sadharam had sexually exploited the prosecutrix/victim on the pretext of marriage and juvenile had helped him in enticing away the minor girl on his motorcycle bearing registration No. C.G. 11-C-8743. The accused were subsequently arrested on 26.07.2016 and remanded to judicial custody. The co- accused in the case, was found to be a juvenile and as he was found driving a motorcycle without a license, Section 3/181 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was added against the juvenile and Section 146/196 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was added against the owner of the vehicle Arjun for driving the vehicle without insurance and Section 3,4 were found to be in violation of Section 5/180 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

3. After completion of due and necessary investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the present accused/respondent before the concerned Jurisdictional Magistrate, who, in turn, committed the case for trial. On the basis of the material contained in the charge-sheet, learned trial Court acquitted the accused/respondent of the offence under Sections 363, 366 of IPC and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 in alternate of Section 376 of IPC against which the present appeal has been filed by the State/appellant.

4. Learned counsel for the State/appellant submits that the learned trial Court failed to appreciate the fact that the submission of the body under the fear or terror cannot be construed as a consented sexual act. Consent for the purpose of Section 375 of IPC requires voluntary participation not only after the exercise of intelligence based on the knowledge of the significance and moral quality of the act, but after having fully exercised the choice between resistance and assent