Order on Board

(21.06.2022)

Sanjay K. Agrawal, J Heard on admission.

(2) This acquittal appeal is directed against the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 02.12.2019, passed by the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon (CG), whereby the respondent herein has been acquitted from the charges of Sections 376, 506, 509 & 354(a)(d) of IPC, which is called in question by the appellant-State by filing this acquittal appeal.

(3) Mr. Sudeep Verma, learned State counsel submits that the learned trial Court is absolutely unjustified in acquitting the respondent herein for the aforementioned charges by recording perverse finding, which is contrary to law and, therefore, this appeal deserves to be admitted for hearing.

(4) The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 27.09.2019 at about 05:00 AM in the morning, in front of complainant’s house in a lane (gali), Geeratola Gandai within the ambit of Police Station Gandai, District Rajnandgaon, the respondent herein has committed sexual intercourse with the major prosecutrix/victim (PW-01) and threatened her to kill and thereby committed the offence.

(5) The learned trial Court after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence available on record acquitted the respondent for the aforementioned charges by holding that the victim being a major woman was the consenting party and the prosecution has failed to prove the offence beyond reasonable doubt.

(6) The prosecutrix/victim has been examined as PW-01 by the learned trial Court. A careful perusal of her statement would show that she has admitted the fact that the place of occurrence is a common lane (gali) used by the villagers. She has also admitted the fact that after the incident, she was not willing to lodge FIR, on account of which, her husband assaulted her and forced her to lodge FIR and, thereafter, her husband got a written complaint typed through an advocate and only on the pressure mounted by her husband she alongwith her husband lodged the FIR that too after a delay of one day, for which no plausible explanation has been putfourth (See: Bhaiyamiyan @ Jardar Khan and another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh1). The prosecutrix/victim has also admitted that there is some incident of outraging her modesty by the respondent herein, against which she has neither lodged report nor informed her husband and other family members. She has also admitted that there was some previous enmity between the respondent here in and her husband, due to which her husband, on earlier occasion, has stopped doing construction work in the respondent’s house. Further, the prosecutrix has stated in her statement that at the time of incident, the respondent herein has caught hold

1 (2011) 6 SCC 394 her mouth and slammed her on ground, due to which she sustained external injuries on various parts of her body, but said statement has not been proved by the medical evidence and even the the doctor (PW-07), who has medically examined the victim, has also not support her statement of sustaining external injuries on the body of victim.

(7) In that view of the matter, the learned trial Court has rightly acquitted the respondent herein from the charges of Sections 376, 506, 509 & 354(a)(d) of IPC. We do not find any perversity or illegality in the findings recorded by the learned trial Court while acquitting the respondent herein and, as such, the present appeal deserve to be dismissed.

(8) Consequently, this acquittal appeal is dismissed in limine without notice to other side.

(9) Before parting with the matter, we would like to notice here some shocking event that we have witnessed in this case while hearing this acquittal appeal. It has been seen that while recording statements of various witnesses the name of victim has been written and disclosed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) as also in some pages of the final report/charge-sheet filed by the police of Police Station Gandai, District Rajnandga