Bindo Bai Vs State of Chhattisgarh

For Appellant : Miss Samiksha Barman on behalf of Shri Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri Anand Verma, Deputy GA. For Respondent No.2 : None.

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Deepak Kumar Tiwari, J

¶13

Judgment On Board

¶14

11/01/2024 :

¶15

This Acquittal Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 13.12.2012 passed by the learned Special Judge {Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989}, Jashpur in Special Criminal Case No.11/2011 whereby the respondents/accused has been acquitted of the charges under Section 452 of the IPC and Section 3 (1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

¶16

2

¶17

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘the Act’) and in alternative, under Section 354 of the IPC.

¶18

Prosecution case is that the prosecutrix ‘B’ (PW-4) is a widow lady. On the date of the incident i.e. 2^nd March, 2011 at about 8 pm when she was preparing to sleep, the respondent/accused with bad intention entered her house and in order to outrage her modesty, caught hold of her right hand & wrist and pulled her towards the room. Upon shouting by the prosecutrix, her nephew ‘R’ (not examined) reached there and on seeing him, the accused/respondent fled away. The prosecutrix also narrated the incident to one person of her village namely, ‘P’ (not examined). On the next day, a meeting was convened in which no settlement has been arrived. Thereafter on 4^th March, 2011, an FIR (Ex.-P/2) was lodged at Police Station Bagbahar.

¶19

After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed. During trial, the respondent/accused abjured his guilt and claimed to be tried. In order to prove the charges, the prosecution has examined as many as 4 witnesses. The respondent/accused in his statement has stated that he has been falsely implicated and has not adduced any defence evidence. After evaluating the evidence, the trial Court has acquitted the respondent/accused of the aforesaid charges. Hence this Appeal.

¶20

Learned counsel for the Appellant would submit that the trial Court has not appreciated the evidence in proper perspective. Learned counsel prays to allow the appeal and convict the

¶21

3

¶22

respondent/accused.

¶23

Per contra, learned State Counsel would submit that he is not challenging the findings arrived at by the trial Court.

¶24

None appeared on behalf of the respondent/accused.

¶25

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection.

¶26

The prosecutrix (PW-4) ‘B’ has stated that on the date of the incident at about 8 pm, when she was at her house, the respondent/ accused has entered her house. At that time, she was at Varandah and the respondent/accused had tried to pull her inside the house. When she raised alarm, her nephew ‘R’ (not examined) reached there and on the next day a village meeting was convened and then she has lodged the report (Ex.-P/2).

¶27

‘R’, who has not been examined, has stated in his statement recorded under Section 161 of the CrPC that on the date of the incident, he saw that the door of the prosecutrix was closed and he pushed the door and saw that the prosecutrix ran outside her house. When he entered the house, he saw that the respondent/accused was present and then he raised objection as to the act of the respondent/ accused.

¶28

The IO (PW-3) admits in his cross-examination that 10 years ago, the prosecutrix and the respondent/accused were caught red handed.

¶29

In view of the above evidence and considering the relations of the prosecutrix with the respondent/accused, this Court is of the view

¶30

4

¶31

that the trial Court has rightly acquitted the respondent/accused of the charges under Section 452 of the IPC and Section 3 (1)(xi) of the Act and in alternative, under Section 354 of the IPC

¶32

The reasons assigned by the trial Court are just and proper, which do not call for any interference.

¶33

In the result, the Appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed.

¶34

(Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge

¶35

Barve

Bindo Bai v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bindo Bai v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harish Sangtani @ Ricky Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rohit Kumhar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Damayanti Debta Vs Sheshdeo Debta (Dead)

Devid Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

State Of Chhattisgarh Vs Dhaniram Khairwar

Smt. Premiya Bai Vs State Of Chhattisgarh