##PAGE1##

2026:CGHC:12396-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 786 of 2023 Neelam Kumar Deshmukh S/o Shailendra Deshmukh Aged About 21 Years R/o Kotgaon, Police Station Arjunda, District : Balod, Chhattisgarh MK DbKD11 yAi a A g :t A UM 5 i e t U 6R: N aA :2 l 1 N R l 0 y P 8 P 2 s R + R6 igE.0 E 0 n 5 E3 e E 3 T. d 10 T 7 ve rsus ... Appellant(s)

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Arjunda, District : Balod, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s)

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Prasoon Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, CJ

16.03.2026

1. This appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 28.03.2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge Balod, District- Balod (C.G.) in Sessions Case No.

28/2020, whereby the appellant has been convicted as under:

Conviction Sentence Under Section 450 of R.I. for 5 years and fine of the IPC. Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine amount, additional R.I. for 03 months.

Under Section 376(2) Imprisonment for life till natural (ञ)(ठ) of the IPC. death and fine of Rs.20,000/-, in default of payment of fine amount, additional R.I. for 06 months.

Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant lodged a written report at Police Station- Arjunda stating that her daughter (the victim), who is deaf and dumb since birth and can only speak minimally regarding her name and village, was alone at home on 29.07.2020 at about 09:00 AM, when the complainant and her husband had gone to work as agricultural labourers in the fields. It is alleged that during this time, the accused Neelam Kumar Deshmukh, who is the son of the complainant’s brother-in- law, entered the house and forcibly committed rape upon the victim. When the complainant returned home in the evening after work, the victim was found crying. She indicated the name of the accused and, through gestures, conveyed that he had committed forcible sexual intercourse with her.

3. On the basis of the said complaint, Crime No. 130/2020 was registered at Police Station Arjunda against the accused under Sections 450 and 376(2)(c)(d) of the Indian Penal Code, and investigation was commenced.

4. During investigation, statements of the complainant and other prosecution witnesses were recorded. The statement of the deaf and dumb victim was recorded with the assistance of a teacher trained in sign language. A spot map of the place of occurrence was prepared, the victim was medically examined, her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded before the Magistrate, relevant articles were seized, and the accused was arrested. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed before the competent Court.

5. Subsequently, charges under Sections 450 and 376(2)(j)(l) of the IPC were framed against the accused. The contents of the charges were read over and explained to him, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. After completion of the prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein he denied all incriminating circumstances appearing against him and stated that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case.

7. After appreciation of evidence available on record, the learned trial Court has convicted the accused/appellant and sentenced him as mentioned in opening para of the judgment. Hence, this appeal.

8. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned trial Court is wholly illegal, perverse, contrary to the evidence on record and bad both in law and on facts, and therefore the same is liable to be set aside and the appellant deserves to be acquitted of all the charges. It is contended that the learned trial Court has f