Dismissed

Kirti Sonwani v. State of Chhattisgarh and Anr.

Chhattisgarh HC8 Sept 2024ACQA/10/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal revision regarding an acquittal, the Chhattisgarh High Court reviewed evidence showing a love affair between the accused and the victim. The Court found the trial court's order reasonable as consent was evident from their relationship.

What did the court decide?

The acquittal appeal against the order of acquittal of the appellant has been dismissed.

Kirti Sonwani Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Anr. — Caste Atrocities | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

2024:CGHC:34961-DB

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

ACQA No. 10 of 2012

¶6

Kirti Sonwani D/o Rajendra Sonwani, aged about 19 years R/o Village Dhekuna, P.S. Simga, Distt. Raipur C.G.

¶7

... Appellant

¶8

versus

¶9

State of Chhattisgarh, through-The District Magistrate, District:Durg, Chhattisgarh.

¶10

Ram Pyara Verma, aged about 20 years, S/o Santosh Verma, R/o Village Khaira,P.S. Nandghat, District:Durg, Chhattisgarh.

¶11

... Respondents

¶12

For Appellant : Mr. Rajkumar Gupta, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. For Respondent/Objector : Mr. Amit Kumar Sahu, Advocate

¶13

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge

¶14

Judgment on Board

¶15

Per Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge

¶16

9/09/2024

¶17

This acquittal appeal arises out of the judgment dated 01.10.2011 passed by the learned Special Judge, Durg in Special Case No.04/2011, whereby the learned trial Court acquitted the accused/respondent of the charges under Sections 376 of the IPC

¶18

¶19

and Section 3(2)(5) of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocity) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred as ‘Act of 1989’).

¶20

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the victim has lodged an F.I.R against Ram Pyara Verma/respondent stating that she was student of class 9^th and the accused/respondent was also studying the same school. It is alleged that in the month of July, the accused/respondent took her in his home at Khaira and committed forcibly sexual intercourse with her without her consent on the pretext of marriage and thereafter many times he committed sexual intercourse with her. It is alleged that when the victim asked to marry her, the accused/respondent denied by stating that she is not belongs to his caste. Based on this an FIR (Ex.P/1) was registered against the respondent for the aforesaid offence. During investigation, spot map was prepared vide Ex.P/4, caste certificate of the complainant was seized vide Ex.P/6, statements of the witnesses were recorded and after completing investigation, charge sheet was filed against the respondent before the concerned trial Court under Sections 376, Section 3(2)(5) of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocity) Act, 1989. Accused/respondent abjured his guilt and prayed for trial.

¶21

Statement of the accused/respondent was recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in which he denied the incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution case, pleaded innocence and false implication. In support of his defence,

¶22

¶23

he has examined none.

¶24

The trial Court after hearing counsel for the parties and appreciating the evidence on record, by the impugned judgment acquitted the accused/respondent of all the charges leveled against him.

¶25

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the trial Court is absolutely unjustified in acquitting the accused/respondent of all the charges by recording findings which are perverse to the record. He further submits that there is ample evidence available on record to connect the accused/respondent with the offences alleged against him and 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 order of acquittal suffers from perversity and illegality, therefore, the same is liable to be set aside.

¶26

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the objector supports the impugned judgment passed by the learned trial Court.

¶27

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned judgment carefully.

¶28

Victim PW-1, in his evidence stated that she is aged about 17 years. She stated that the respondent/accused also studying in his School, Nandghat. The accused/respondent used to love her and wanted to marry her. When she was studying in class 9 for the second time, the accused took her on his motorcycle to his house

¶29

¶30

in Khaira at 12:30 in the afternoon and made physical relation with her for about an hour. Then after a month, again the respondent/accused committed sexual intercourse with her in his house in village Khaira, and again in the field and his house at village Dhekuna, he made physical relation with her.

¶31

She admitted in her cross-examination that she knew the accused/respondent since she was in studying in 9^th standard. She had failed in 9^th standard for one year. She stated that the accused used to study in the same class. While studying in 9^th standard, she stated that both of them used to meet and talk to each other. When she failed in 9^th standard and the accused reached 10^th standard, even then she used to meet and talk to the accused. She stated that she liked the accused and he liked her and there was a love affair started between them. The witness has also admitted that after one year of their love relation, she made physical relation wit the accused.

¶32

Dr. Rajshri Devdhar (PW-10), who conducted the medical examination of the prosecutrix and submitted a report vide Ex.P/11A, in which, she stated that she found that the victim was fully physically developed, there was no injury in any part of her body and the hymen was torn. She stated that the victim could be aged 17-18 years. She further stated that there was no injury in the internal part of the victim's body, therefore, she cannot give a definite opinion regarding sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix.

¶33

Dr. A.K. Sahu (PW-2), Radiologist, District Hospital, Durg has

¶34

¶35

conducted X- ray of the victim submitted a report vide Ex.P-5, in which, he stated that the age of the victim is about 18-19 years.

¶36

Rajendra Kumar Sonawani (PW-9), father of the prosecutrix stated in his evidence that at the time of the incident victim was 17 years old and on the date of incident, she went out of her house in Dhekuna to village Khaira on her own without informing him. He admitted that her daughter/victim was having a love affair with the accused and because of which, she used to go to meet with accused.

¶37

12.Reverting to the facts of the present case, the learned trial Court has elaborately discussed the evidence led by the prosecution and after analyzing the entire evidence led by the prosecution, the trial Court found that from the statements of the victim and her father, it is evident that there was a love affair between the victim and the accused/respondent, due to which, they had made physical relations many times. In fact, it does not appear that the victim was raped by the accused forcefully and the victim did not object during the physical relationship with the accused which clearly shows the victim was a consenting party. Also, the above evidence also does not prove that the accused committed any crime on the basis of caste against the victim . Thus, the prosecution has not been able to prove the offence against the respondent/accused under under Sections 376 of the IPC and Section 3(2)(5) of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocity) Act, 1989 and its ingredients which in my considered opinion, is a correct finding.

¶38

¶39

After considering the facts and circumstances of the case, material available on record, considering the statement of victim (PW-1) and Rajendra kumar Sonwani(PW-9), father of the victim that the victim and accused/respondent are known to each other during school time and both of them in love relation, because of which, they had made physical relation, thus, the victim was a consenting party, hence, we are of the considered opinion that the judgment impugned acquitting the accused/respondent is just and proper and does not call for any interference.

¶40

14.Accordingly, this acquittal appeal against the acquittal of the accused/respondent of the aforesaid offences is hereby dismissed .

¶41

SD/-

¶42

SD/-

¶43

(Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice

¶44

Amardeep

Kirti Sonwani v. State of Chhattisgarh and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kirti Sonwani v. State of Chhattisgarh and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vishal Vishwakarma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Niharika Sinha Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Gomati Bai Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Vikas Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ravishankar @ Bittu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Jairam Gadhewal Vs State of Chhattisgarh