2025:CGHC:56308 NAFR The date when The date when The date when the the judgment the judgment is judgment is uploaded on is reserved pronounced the website Operative Full

20.08.2025 19.11.2025 -- 20.11.2025 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Judgment reserved on: 20.08.2025 Judgment delivered on: 19.11.2025 CRA No. 636 of 2007

1 - Rajkumar @ Bhogaoo, S/o Harishankar, Aged about 18 years R/o Gram Chattarpur, Uperpara, Kalyanpur, P.S. Gandhi Nagar, Distt.

Surguja, C.G.

... Appellant versus

1 - State of Chhattisgarh through District- Magistrate, District- Sarguja (C.G.).

... Respondent(s)

Hon’ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey

C A V Judgment

1. The present appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.06.2007 passed by the learned Special Sessions Judge (Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes) / Additional Sessions Judge, Ambikapur, Sarguja (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No. 123/2006, whereby the learned trial Court has convicted the appellant and sentenced him as under:-

2. Brief facts of the case are that on 26.09.2006, at about 3:00 PM, the prosecutrix, along with her elder sister, had gone to a field in Village Chhattarpur to cut grass. At that time, the accused, who belongs to the Bargah caste, allegedly came there, caught hold of her, threw her on the ground in the field, and committed rape upon her against her will and without her consent. Upon hearing her cries, some persons reached the spot, to whom she narrated the incident. She also informed her mother and brother about the occurrence on the same day, while her father was out of the village. When her father returned the next day, a village panchayat meeting was convened. After the panchayat proceedings, a report was lodged. On the basis of the report, a criminal investigation was initiated. After completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambikapur, from where the case was committed to the Court of Session for trial. The learned trial Court framed charges against the appellant for the offences punishable under Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and Section 376(1) of the IPC, to which, appellant abjured his guilt and claimed to be tried.

3. In order to establish the guilt of the accused/appellant, the prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses. The statement of the accused/appellant was recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, wherein he denied all the incriminating circumstances put to him and pleaded innocence as well as false implication in the case. However, the appellant did not adduce any evidence in his defence.

4. The learned trial Court, upon appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on record, by its judgment dated 30.06.2007, found the evidence adduced by the prosecution to be trustworthy and accordingly convicted the appellant and sentenced him as mentioned in paragraph 1 of the judgment.

Hence, this appeal.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned judgment is contrary to the law as well as the facts and circumstances of the case. The trial Court failed to appreciate that the prosecution did not produce any admissible or reliable evidence against the appellant. The prosecutrix was a major and was in a consensual love relationship with the appellant, who is her neighbour, and upon being seen in a compromising position by her sister, the prosecutrix was compelled by her parents to lodge a false allegation of rape against the appellant. He further submits that there is an unexplained delay of four days in lodging the FIR, which creates serious doubt regarding the prosecution story. The appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. The prosecution has failed to examine any material witness or produce evidence as required by law to sustain the conviction of the appellant. The impugned judgment