2026:CGHC:2124-DB The date when The date when The date when the the judgment is the judgment is judgment is uploaded on reserved pronounced the website Operative Full --- ---- -- 15.01.2026 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR ACQA No. 197 of 2018  State of Chhattisgarh, Through – The Police Station –

Nagarnar, District Bastar (C.G.).

... Appellant versus  Premchand Nag @ Bholu, S/o Shri Sukhchand Nag, aged about 22 years, R/o Maadpal Patarpara, Police Station –

Nagarnar, District Bastar (C.G.).

... Respondents For Appellant/State : Mr. Nand Kumari Kashyap, P.L.

For Respondent : Mr. Vikas Shrivastava, Advocate.

DB : Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey &

Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal Judgment on Board (14.01.2026)

Per Rajani Dubey, J

1. The present acquittal appeal has been filed by the State/appellant herein against the judgment dated 03.11.2017 passed in Special Sessions Case No.14/2017 by the learned Additional Session Judge (FTC) (under POCSO Act), Bastar at Jagdalpur (C.G.), whereby the learned trial Court acquitted the accused/respondent herein from the charge punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that father of prosecutrix (PW-2) filed a written report at police station – Nagarnar to the effect that on 27.02.2017 at around 2.30 PM, his daughter (prosecutrix) PW-1, aged around 14 years, left the house saying that she was going to her mother but did not return home by evening. Thereafter, he went to the elder mother of his daughter and enquired from her but he received no clue. On the basis of said report, an FIR (Ex.P- 5) being Crime No.23/2017 was registered against unknown person for the offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC. During search operation, the prosecutrix was recovered from the house of accused/respondent and recovery panchanama was prepared vide Ex.P-4. Thereafter, after obtaining the consent (Ex.P-3) of prosecutrix (PW-1) and her parents (Ex.P-8), prosecutrix was sent for medical examination to Maharani Hospital, Jagdalpur vide Ex.P-14, where she was medically examined by Dr. (Smt.) Bhawani Bhagat (PW-14) and gave her report under Ex.P-18 noticing no injuries on her body and opined that no definite opinion regarding commission of rape can be given. Mark list of class 8 of the prosecutrix was seized from Govt. Middle School, Maadpal and seizure memo was prepared vide Ex.P-7. Undergarment of the prosecutrix stained with sperm was seized vide Ex.P-1. Clothes of the accused/respondent wore at the time of incident was seized vide Ex.P-12. The accused/respondent was arrested vide Ex.P-13 and he was sent for medical examination too. After arresting the accused/respondent and upon completion of usual investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against accused/respondent under Sections 363, 366, 376 of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 6 of the POCSO Act before the jurisdictional Court followed by charge under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of IPC & Section 6 of POCSO Act. The accused/respondent however denied the charge and pleaded for trial.

3. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined as many as 16 witnesses. Statement of the accused/respondent was also recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. wherein the accused/respondent pleaded innocence and false implication in the crime, however, no defence witness was examined in the case.

4. The learned Trial Court after hearing counsel for the respective parties and considering the material available on record, by the impugned judgment acquitted the accused/respondent of the charge under Sections 363, 366, 376 of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act. Hence, this appeal by the State.

5. Ms. Nand Kumari Kashyap, learned P.L. for the State/appellant submits that the impugned judgment, findings, and order of acquittal passed by the learned Trial Judge are illegal, improper, and erroneous, and therefore liable to be set aside. It is submitted that the learned Trial Court committed serious error