Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 19499
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRA No. 487 of 2008
Reserved on 22/06/2026
Pronounced on 29/06/2026
Raju Sahu S/o Sahas Ram Sahu, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Village Mudhapar, Chowki Hasaud, Jaijepur, District Janjgir Champa (CG)
... Appellant
versus
The State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Police Chowki Hasaud, Jaijepur, District Janjgir Champa (CG)
---- Respondent
For Appellant : Mr. S.C. Verma, learned Senior Counsel appears along with Ms. Pooja Sahu, Advocate.
For State/Respondent : Ms. K. Radhika, Panel Lawyer
Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Sexual Offence
Act Referred
Headnote
Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted by the trial court for offences under Sections 376(1) and 506 Part-II of IPC based on the allegations of the prosecutrix that she was sexually exploited on the pretext of marriage. The defence relied on a prior complaint and legal notice issued by the appellant against the victim. The medical evidence did not support the claims of pregnancy or injury.
Findings of Court:
The testimony of the prosecutrix lacked corroboration, was inconsistent with medical findings, and appeared to be a retaliatory measure following the appellant's own legal action against her. The trial court's failure to consider specific documentary evidence submitted by the defence warranted the acquittal.
Issues: Whether the conviction under Section 376(1) and 506 Part-II of IPC was sustainable given the lack of credible evidence and the presence of potential ulterior motives.
Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of corroborative evidence, where the prosecutrix's version is contradicted by medical reports and surrounding circumstances, including prior complaints by the accused casting doubt on the motive, the appellant cannot be held guilty.
Result: Appeal allowed; appellant acquitted.
For the Appellants/Petitioners: S.C. Verma, Pooja Sahu
For the Respondents: K. Radhika
C A V Judgment
1. This appeal has been preferred by the accused/appellant under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short the Cr.P.C.), questioning the legality and propriety of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 23.04.2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sakti, District- Janjgir Champa (CG) in Sessions Trial No.167/2007, whereby, the appellant- Raju Sahu, has been convicted and sentenced as under :-
| Conviction | Sentence |
|---|---|
| Under Section 376 (1) of IPC | R.I. for 07 years and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for 03 months. |
| Under Section 506 Part-II of IPC | R.I. for 03 years and fine of Rs.200/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for 02 months. |
| Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. | |
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 22.12.2006, an FIR (Ex.P-5) was lodged by the victim before the Out post- Hasaud, District Janjgir Champa, alleging inter alia, that on 29.09.2006 around 9.00 am, the appellant, at the relevant time, came and while caught hold of her hand, dragged towards the Pump House and by alluring her to marry, committed sexual intercourse and threatened to kill, if she disclosed the alleged incident to anyone and, thereafter, exploited her physically every other day in the said Pump House and refused to marry when she insisted for it. It is alleged further that as per his instructions, she entered into his house on 04.11.2006 and started living there, where also, he used to commit sexual intercourse on the pretext of marriage. Further of her allegation is that instead of marrying, he fled away, which compelled her to lodge the alleged report (Ex.P-5) and, based upon which, an offence under Sections 376(1) and 506 of IPC has been registered against him in connection with Crime No.322/2006. During the course of investigation, she was examined medically by Dr. Saroj Kachhap (PW-5), who vide her MLC report (Ex.P-7), found her habitual to intercourse and has not found any internal or external injuries on her body and, during the further investigation, her petticoat “Saya” with stains, like sperm, as well as her vaginal slide were seized from her vide Ex.P-9 and Ex.P-17, respectively, on 23.12.2006, while semen slide belonging to the appellant was recovered with sealed cover vide Ex.P-15 on 09.01.2007 apart from his underwear and the alleged articles, so recovered, were sent for chemical examination on 20.02.2007 vide Ex.P-25 and, after completion of the usual investigation, the charge-sheet was submitted before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sakti, who in turn, committed the matter to the trial Court, where based upon the materials available on record, the appellant was charge-sheeted for the offence punishable under Sections 376 (1) and 506 Part-II of IPC, which was denied by him and claimed to be tried.
3. In order to bring home the guilt of the appellant, the prosecution has examined as many as 14 witnesses and exhibited 27 documents, while the appellant has produced 9 documents, including the legal notice (Ex.D-3) issued by him and the complaint (Ex.D-7) lodged against the victim, in his defence.
4. The trial Court, after considering the evidence led by the prosecution, arrived at a conclusion that since the consent of the victim for commission of the alleged sexual intercourse was obtained by the appellant while assuring her on false promise of marriage, therefore, her consent for the alleged relations cannot be held to be consensual in nature and, it was held further that though, there was delay in lodging the alleged report (Ex.P-5), but since she was assured by the appellant to solemnize the marriage with her, therefore, the alleged delay in lodging the report would not give any benefit to the appellant and, in consequence, he was held guilty for the commission of the alleged offence and has been convicted and sentenced as mentioned here
