An appellate court must not interfere with a trial court’s order of acquittal unless the findings are perverse, manifestly illegal, or impossible, even if a different view is possible upon re-evaluation of the evidence, as the scope of interference in such cases is limited.

Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

22.04.2026

1. Heard Mr. Soumya Rai, learned Deputy Government Advocate for the petitioner/State on I.A. No.01, which is an application for condonation of delay of 45 days in filing the instant petition.

2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner/State and considering the reasons mentioned in the application, we are of the considered opinion that sufficient cause has been shown in the application and accordingly, I.A. No.01 is allowed and delay of 45 days in filing the instant petition is condoned.

3. The State has sought leave to appeal against the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 17.11.2025 passed in Special Criminal Case (POCSO) No.60/2023 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTSC, Jagdalpur, District Jagdalpur (C.G.), whereby the learned Sessions Judge has acquitted the respondent/accused from the offence punishable under Sections 376(3), 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘IPC’) as well as Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, ‘POCSO Act’) holding that the prosecution has failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt.

4. The brief gist of the prosecution case is that on 25.10.2023, the victim (PW-1) lodged a written complaint (Ex.P/1) at Police Station, Bhanpuri, stating that in the year 2019, when she was studying in Class 10th, she was a minor. During that period, the accused Phool Kumar Nag, who resided in front of her house in the same village, expressed his desire to marry her by stating that he liked her. The victim (PW-1), however, declined, stating that she was still young and pursuing her studies.

5. It is the case of the prosecution that thereafter, the accused persistently followed and harassed the victim (PW-1), and in February 2019, he took her to bushes situated behind the primary school and committed forcible sexual intercourse against her will on the pretext of love and promise of marriage. When the victim (PW-1) resisted and threatened to disclose the incident to her family members, the accused allegedly threatened to kill her. Owing to such threats and fear, she did not disclose the incident to anyone.

6. It is further alleged that thereafter, the accused continued to establish physical relations with the victim (PW-1) against her will on several occasions. In March 2023, the victim came to know that she had become pregnant. Upon informing the accused, he assured her that he would marry her shortly. However, when the pregnancy advanced and the victim disclosed the incident to her family members, they approached the accused for marriage, but he absconded without informing anyone.

7. On the basis of the written complaint (Ex.P/1), a First Information Report (Ex.P/2) was registered against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n) and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, and the matter was taken up for investigation.

8. During the course of investigation, the Class 10th mark-sheet of the victim (Article A/1) was seized vide seizure memo (Ex.P/5) in presence of witnesses. A knife allegedly used in the incident was seized vide seizure memo (Ex.P/6). The guardianship certificate (Ex.P/10) was obtained from the father of the victim (PW-3) to establish her date of birth. On the basis of the memorandum of the victim (PW-1), a spot map (Ex.P/3) was prepared. Thereafter, Patwari Nitish Dewangan (PW-4) prepared a Panchnama