2025:CGHC:60899-DB D si i g g n it e a d l l b y y NAFR JYOTI JYOTI SHARMA SHARMA Date:

2025.12.17

11:44:09 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1144 of 2023 Virendra Nihal Aged About 22 Years R/o Sudama Nagar, Shivshankar Chowk Police Station Tikrapara, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s)

versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Tikrapara, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s)

For Appellant : Mr. Ram Krishna Dixit, Advocate For Respondent/State: Mr. Soumya Rai, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Judgment on Board Per Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge

15.12.2025

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 03.03.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,(1st Fast Track Special Court), District Raipur C.G. in Special Criminal Case No. 85/2021 whereby the appellant has been sentence and convicted as under:-

Conviction Sentence Under Section 456 of R.I. for 01 year and fine of Rs. 500/- with the IPC default stipulations.

Under Section 376 (3) R.I. for 20 years and fine of Rs. 50,000/-

of the IPC with default stipulations.

Under Section 376 (2) R. I. For 10 years and fine of Rs. 5,000/-

(n) of the IPC with default stipulations.

Under Section 506 R.I. for 01 year and fine of Rs. 500/- with Part-II of the IPC default stipulations.

( All the sentences are directed to run concurrently)

2. Case of the prosecution is that the complainant/victim, a minor, submitted a written application to Tikrapara Police Station stating that for the preceding four to five months, the accused, Virendra Nihal, her neighbor, had repeatedly expressed his love for her, despite her telling him that he was like an uncle. She alleged that on the night of 8th December 2020, while she was sleeping separately in the living room with her grandmother and her parents were asleep on the roof, the accused entered the house without permission around 1:00–1:30 AM. He forcibly took her to the kitchen, covered her mouth when she screamed, removed her knicker, and had sexual intercourse with her against her will, threatening to defame her at school if she disclosed the incident. The victim further stated that the accused came to her house three to four times during December 2020, forcibly committing sexual intercourse after threatening her on each occasion. He would also follow her to school. Based on the victim’s complaint, First Information Report (FIR) No. 97/2021 was lodged against the appellant. After completing the investigation, the appellant was arrested and charge sheet was filed.

3. The trial court has framed charges against the appellant for the aforementioned offence and the appellant abjured his guilt and pleaded innocence.

4. In order to bring home the offence, the prosecution examined as many as 06 witnesses and 24 documents. The statement of the appellant under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was also recorded in which he denied the material appearing against him and stated that he is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the case. After appreciation of evidence available on record, the learned trial Court has convicted the accused/appellant and sentenced him as mentioned in para 1 of the judgment. Hence, this appeal.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned trial Court is wholly contrary to the facts and evidence on record and is, therefore, liable to be set aside. It was contended that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case, as the prosecution has failed to prove any of the allegations against him, and the complaint is baseless and motivated, arising out of a prior dispute between the appellant and the complainant. It was further submitted that the medical evidence clearly indicates the absence of any injuries on the victim’s body, both internal and external, and that it was not possible for the alleged offen