2025:CGHC:14752-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 993 of 2014

1 - Kaleshvar Patanwar S/o Tribhuvan Patanwar Aged About 29 Years S/o Village Bitkula P.S. Seepat, Distt. Bilaspur C.G. , Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s)

versus

1 - State of Chhattisgarh S/o Through The Distt. Magistrate Bilaspur C.G. , Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s)

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Samrath Singh Marhas, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge

Order on Board

Per Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J

27/03/2025

1. This appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, (for short the, Cr.P.C.) against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 10.09.2014 passed by Learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC) Bilaspur (C.G.) in Special Sessions Case No. 64/2014, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced in the following manner:-

Conviction Sentences

U/s 363 of I.P.C. R.I. for 5 years and fine of Rs. 1000/-. in

default of payment of fine, further RI for 01 month.

U/s 366 of I.P.C. R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine, further RI for 01 month.

U/s 376(2)(i) of IPC No separate sentence has been awarded U/s 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5000/- in Offences Act, 2012. default of payment of fine, further RI for 06 months.

All the sentence are directed to run concurrently.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the father of the victim, P.W. 3, has lodged a report (Ex. P-3) to the police station Seepat, District Bilaspur, on 02-10- 2013 with the allegation that on 29-09-2013, his sister in law and his two daughters had gone to the house of the appellant and the appellant has kidnapped his younger daughter on the pretext of marriage which was informed to him by his elder daughter. Despite her search, she could not be found, and therefore, he lodged the report. The FIR for the offence under Sections 363 and 366 of IPC has been recorded against the appellant. After about some days, the father of the appellant took her to the police station, and then she was sent for her medical examination to the District Hospital, Bilaspur, where Dr. R. Tekam medically examined her and gave report Ex. P- 8. The appellant has admitted the medical report of the victim as provided under Section 294 of the Cr.P.C., and therefore, the doctor has not been examined. While medically examining the victim, the doctor has not noticed any external injury over her body and opined that no definite opinion can be given regarding rape. However, referred to radiologist for age determination. Two slides of her vaginal swab were prepared, sealed and handed over to the police for FSL examination. With respect to the age and date of birth of the victim, the police have seized the high school certificate of the victim vide seizure memo Ex. P-2 in which the date of birth of the victim is mentioned as 01-06-1997. Spot map Ex. P-5 was prepared by the police. The appellant was arrested on 02-12-2013 and he too was sent for his medical examination to the Primary Health Centre, Seepat, where he was medically examined by Dr. Rajesh Kumar, who gave his report Ex. P-9. The appellant has admitted the medical report of the appellant as provided under Section 294 of the Cr.P.C., and therefore, the doctor has not been examined. The vaginal slides of the victim and her underwear were sent for chemical examination to State FSL, Raipur, from where report Ex. P-15 was received and semen and sperm were not found on the sent articles. The Statements under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. of the witnesses have been recorded, and after completion of the usual investigation, charge sheet for the offence under Section 363, 366, 376 of IPC and Sections 7 and 8 of the POCSO Act was filed before the learned trial court.

3. The learned trial court has framed the charge under Sections 363 and 366 of IPC and Section 376