Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 12229

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Ramesh Sinha, CJ, Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J
Laxman Devdas – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
CRA No. 758 of 2025

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Kamlesh Patel
For the Respondents: Soumya Rai

A conviction for kidnapping and rape of a minor cannot be sustained when the prosecution fails to provide cogent, admissible evidence to prove the victim's age, and the victim's own evidence demonstrates she was a consenting party who eloped voluntarily.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) - POCSO Act, 2012 - Sections 6, 11, 12 - Age determination - Requirement of cogent evidence - Admission in school register without author - Evidentiary value - Held, prosecution failed to prove victim was minor on date of incident beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 12, 13, 16)

(B) Kidnapping/Abduction vs. Elopement - Voluntary accompaniment - Consenting party - Victim eloped with appellant out of her own free will, engaged in physical relationship without force/coercion - Insufficiency of evidence to show kidnapping from lawful guardianship. (Para 20, 21)

(C) Evidence - Credibility of victim testimony - When victim statement lacks consistency and is contradicted by other evidence, conviction cannot be sustained based solely on such testimony. (Para 26)

Facts of the case:
The father of the victim filed a missing person report. Upon recovery, the victim alleged she was kidnapped and subjected to rape. The trial court convicted the appellant for kidnapping and rape, despite the appellant claiming the victim was major and their relationship was consensual. The prosecution relied on school records for age proof, which the appellant challenged.

Findings of Court:
The Court held the prosecution failed to establish the victim's minority as the school records were not proven by the author and lacked sufficient basis. The victim’s own testimony and conduct established she was a consenting party who eloped voluntarily. Therefore, the conviction was set aside due to lack of proof of age and absence of forced abduction.

Issues: Whether the victim was a minor at the time of the incident and whether the appellant committed the offences of kidnapping and rape under the IPC and POCSO Act.

Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of primary evidence to prove age, and given the victim's own admission of voluntary elopement and consent, the essential ingredients of the criminal charges were not satisfied to the standard of 'beyond reasonable doubt'.

Result: Appeal allowed; appellant acquitted.

Table of Content
1. summary of trial court conviction and case background (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
2. arguments regarding minority and consensual relationship (Para 8 , 9)
3. legal standard for age determination and documentary proof (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)
4. distinction between kidnapping and voluntary accompaniment (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)
5. assessment of evidence and standard for acquittal (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29)

Order on Board

Per Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge

1. Heard Kamlesh Patel, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. Soumya Rai, learned Panel Lawyer for the Respondent / State.

2. Being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 24.03.2025 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, FTSC, (POCSO), Balod, Dist- Balod, in Special Sessions Case (POCSO) No. 116/2021 hereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as below:-

S.No.	Conviction	Sentences
1	U/s 363 of IPC	R.I. for 5 years and fine of Rs. 1000/- in default of payment of fine RI for 01 year.
2	U/s 366 of IPC	R.I. for 7 years and fine of Rs. 1000/- in default of payment of fine RI for 01 year.
3	U/s 6 of POCSO Act	R.I. for 20 years and fine of Rs. 1000/- in default of payment of fine RI for 01 year. All the sentences shall run concurrently.

3. Brief facts of the case are that on 08.11.2021, the father of the victim (PW/5) has lodged a missing report to the Police Station Gundardehi that his minor daughter is missing since 06.11.2021 who had gone to enjoy Matar festival, but had not returned. Despite her search, her whereabouts could not be traced out. The FIR (Ex-P/14) was registered against the unknown persons for the offence under Section 363 of IPC. The another copy of FIR is (Ex-P/33). During the inquiry, the victim was recovered on 15.11.2021 at bus stand, Patewa and recovery panchanama (Ex-P/1) was prepared in presence of the witnesses. She was sent for her medical examination to District Hospital Balod, where (PW/3) Dr. M. Choubey medically examined her and gave her report (Ex-P/10). While medically examined the victim, the doctor has noticed that her hymen was torned, however, there was no external injuries found on her body and opined that no definite opinion can be given regarding sexual assault. Two slides of her vaginal swabs were prepared, sealed and handed over to the Police for FSL examination. The Spot map (Ex-P/15) was prepared by the Police and (Ex-P/16) was prepared by the Patwari. Underwear of the victim has been seized vide seizure memo (Ex-P/4). One mobile phone has also been seized from the victim vide seizure memo (Ex-P/5). With respect to the age and date of birth of the victim, the school register has been seized vide seizure memo (Ex-P/8) and according to the school register the date of birth of the victim is 25.09.2004. After retaining its attested true copy (Article-A(c)) the original register was returned back to the school. The high school certificate of the victim has also been seized by the Police vide seizure memo (Ex-P/18). The appellant was arrested on 18/11/2021 and he too was sent for his medical examination to District Hospital Balod where Dr. A.P. Chandrakar (PW/4) has examined him and he found that the appellant is capable to perform sexual intercourse and gave his report (Ex P/12). The underwear of the appellant has also been seized vide seizure memo (Ex-P/20). The motor cycle has been seized vide seizure memo (Ex-P/21). The motor cycle of the appellant has been seized vide seizure memo (Ex-P/27) and his mobile phone has also been seized vide seizure memo (Ex-P/28). The underwears of the victim as well as appellant and the vaginal slides of the victim was sent for its chemical examination to FSL, Raipur. The Statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. of the victim was also recorded. The statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. of the prosecution witnesses have also been recorded and after completion of the usual investigation, the charge-sheet was

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 12229

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPURRamesh Sinha, CJ, Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, JLaxman Devdas – AppellantVersusState Of Chhattisgarh – RespondentCRA No. 758 of 2025

A conviction for kidnapping and rape of a minor cannot be sustained when the prosecution fails to provide cogent, admissible evidence to prove the victim's age, and the victim's own evidence demonstrates she was a consenting party who eloped voluntarily.

Cases Referred (3)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Ramesh Sinha, CJ, Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J
Laxman Devdas – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
CRA No. 758 of 2025