The High Court dismissed the State's appeal against the trial court's acquittal of the accused in a rape trial. Upholding the trial court's view that the prosecutrix conspired in the act, the court held the acquittal was legal and proper without reversal.
The appeal against the acquittal is dismissed; the judgment of acquittal is upheld.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
ACQA No. 454 of 2010
----Appellant
Versus
---- Respondent
For Appellant/State Mr. Sudeep Verma, Deputy G.A. For Respondent Mr. Arpan Verma, Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal &
Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal
Order on Board
03.10.2023
Radhakishan Agrawal, J.
2
husband came and after seeing him, the accused/respondent asked the husband of the prosecutrix to forgive him. Thereafter, prosecutrix along with her husband went to the police station and lodged the FIR (Ex.P-3) against the respondent. The prosecutrix was sent for medical examination and Dr. Mamta Thakur (PW-6) conducted examination upon the prosecutrix and was unable to give definite opinion with respect to immediate sexual intercourse because there is no evidence of recent injuries on her body, her report is Ex.P-7. The accused/respondent was also sent for medical examination and Dr. Bhan Singh Dhruv (PW-1) conducted examination and found that respondent is capable to perform sexual intercourse vide Ex.P-1. During the course of investigation, clothes of prosecutrix were seized vide Ex.P-5 and vide Ex.P-7, undergarment of respondent was seized.
3
Court is absolutely unjustified in acquitting the accused/respondent herein of said charge by recording perverse findings. He further submits that there is evidence available on record to connect the accused/respondent with the offence alleged against him and despite that, the learned trial Court has committed grave error in acquitting the accused/respondent without appreciating the evidence on record in its correct perspective, thus the impugned judgment of acquittal suffers from perversity and illegality, therefore, the same is liable to be set aside.
State of Kerala reported in (2022) 8 SCC 440 has considered the scope of interference in Appeal against acquittal, which reads as under:-
4
accused has to be disturbed only by thorough scrutiny on the accepted legal parameters.”
5
respondent/accused beyond reasonable doubt and as such, acquitted him of the said charge. Having gone through the findings recorded by the trial Court and taking into account the evidence adduced by the prosecution, this Court finds no illegality or infirmity in the impugned judgment.
Sd/Sd/( Sanjay K. Agrawal ) ( Radhakishan Agrawal ) Judge Judge
Akhilesh
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellate court can reverse the trial court's acquittal in an appeal under Section 378 CrPC when two possible views of evidence exist and the trial court favored the accused.
Whether the evidence on record justified the trial court's finding that the prosecutrix was a consenting party in a rape charge.
Whether the acquittal judgment of the trial court suffers from perversity, illegality, or infirmity warranting interference by the High Court.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Jafarudheen and others vs. State of KeralaExplained¶28
Jafarudheen and others vs. State of Kerala reported in (2022) 8 SCC 440 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
State of Chhattisgarh, Through Station House Officer, Police Station Palari, District Raipur, C.G.
Gautram, S/o Bhuneshwar Verma
Sanjay K. Agrawal
Radhakishan Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
