IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Reserved On : November 20, 2025 Pronounced On : December 02, 2025 XXXXXX .... Appellant vs.

State of Punjab and another .... Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA.

HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR.

* * *

Present : Mr. Rakhi Sharma, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Akshay Kumar, AAG, Punjab.

* * *

SUKHVINDER KAUR , J . :

CRM-47467-2025 :

This is application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 349 days in filing the present appeal. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and delay of 349 days in filing the present appeal is hereby condoned, subject to all just exceptions.

The application stands disposed of.

Main Appeal :

1. Appellant/prosecutrix (name withheld) has preferred the instant appeal against judgment dated 14.09.2022, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Ludhiana, vide which respondent No.2/accused Vijay Verma has been acquitted in case FIR No.215 dated 12.10.2021, under Sections 376 IPC, registered at Police Station Tibba, District Ludhiana.

2. Shorn off the unnecessary details, the brief facts, as per prosecution version is that the aforesaid FIR was registered on the basis of complaint made by the complainant/appellant/prosecutrix, wherein she stated that she was resident of Delhi and her married sister namely Pooja was resident of Ludhiana. The prosecutrix went to stay with her sister, where she met respondent no.2/accused and developed friendship with her. The accused took her to Vaishno Devi and by putting vermillion in her forehead, assured her that they were now married. Then, the prosecutrix was taken to a hotel by the accused, who developed physical relations with her, telling her that he had married her. Thereafter, the prosecutrix came back to Delhi and in the month of September 2021, the accused called her to Ludhiana, took her to a friend’s house and left her there. He also gave beatings to her, while snatching her phone and purse containing Rs.25,000/-. When she told about the conduct of the accused to his parents, he started quarreling with the prosecutrix and sent her back to Delhi. Thereafter, on the basis of these allegations, FIR in question was registered.

3. During investigation, rough site plan of place of occurrence was prepared. Complainant/victim was got medico legally examined. Statement of appellant under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded. On completion of investigation, Challan was presented in the Court.

4. Offence under Section 376 IPC, being exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, this case was committed to the Court of Sessions by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panipat on 17.03.2022.

5. Finding a prima facie case, charge was framed against the accused under Section 376 IPC, vide order dated 11.04.2022, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

6. As many as seven witnesses were examined by the prosecution to prove its case. Statement of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded while putting all incriminating evidence to him. He claimed innocence and false implication. However, no defence evidence was led by the accused.

7. After considering the evidence on record, learned Trial Court found the same to be woefully insufficient to convict the accused who was accordingly acquitted of the offences for which he had been charge-sheeted, vide impugned judgment dated 14.09.2022.

8. Aggrieved of the said decision, present appeal has been filed by the appellant/complainant challenging acquittal of the accused/

respondent No.2.

9. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that in the present case, the appellant had been deceived twice by the accused. Earlier, upon the false promise of marriage, he obtained the consent of appellant fraudulently and under the misconception of facts, developed physical relations with her. Later on, on the same pretext, upon making false promise of marriage, he got favourable statement from the accused,