Dismissed

Raghubir Bharti @ Ghurwa v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC21 Nov 2024CRA/707/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an appeal against conviction and sentencing for rape and related offences under IPC and POCSO Act, the High Court affirmed the trial court's finding. The court held the evidence was sufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, rendering the findings non-perverse, and dismissed the appeal.

What did the court decide?

The criminal appeal was dismissed in the interest of justice and law.

Raghubir Bharti @ Ghurwa Vs State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

1 / 3

2024:CGHC:45796

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

CRA No. 707 of 2019

¶6

1 - Raghubir Bharti @ Ghurwa S/o Shri Hetram Bharti Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Ulkhar, P.S. Sarangarh, District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶7

... Appellant

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Sarangarh, District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶10

... Respondent

¶11

For Appellant : Mr. Vineet Kumar Pandey, Advocate For State/Respondent : Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, Panel Lawyer

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas

¶13

Order On Board

¶14

22.11.2024

¶15

This criminal appeal has been filed being aggrieved by the judgment dated 31.03.2018 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Sarangarh, District- Raigarh (C.G.) in Special Criminal Case No. 11/2016 whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced in the following manner:-

¶16

Conviction	Sentence
U/s 376 (2)(i) of IPC	: R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default of payment of fine, additional R.I. for 6 months.
U/s 506(B) of IPC	: R.I. for 01 year and fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default ofpayment of fine, additional R.I. for 1

¶17

2 / 3

¶18

	month.
U/s 6 of	POCSO : R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs. 2000/- and in
Act, 2012	default of payment of fine, additional R.I. for 6 months.

¶19

In compliance of direction issued by this Court, the Secretary, Legal Services Authority has called status report from concerned Jail Superintendent wherein it has been mentioned that the appellant has already been released from jail on 18.10.2024 on completion of jail sentence awarded to him by the trial Court granting benefit of remission as he had already suffered 7 years 10 months & 03 days of jail sentence out of maximum 10 years as awarded by the learned trial Court.

¶20

The record of the case would demonstrate that the prosecution to prove guilt of the appellant has examined as many as 19 witnesses and exhibited documents (Ex. P/1 to P/25). The prosecution also exhibited the FSL report, report of medical examination of the victim.

¶21

The victim aged 08 years was examined before the trial Court as PW08 wherein she has stated that she was riding her bicycle near her house then the appellant came and said that he will teach how to ride bicycle after that he pushed my bicycle and took me towards barn where he pressed my mouth, opened my clothes and then committed rape. The said evidence remains unrebuttal during cross examination.

¶22

The prosecution to prove guilt of the appellant has also examined Dr. J. Tripathi (PW-9) who has stated that on 03.11.2016 she has examined the victim but she cannot give definite opinion that whether the victim was subjected to rape or not.

¶23

On the basis of evidence and material placed on record as also the

¶24

3 / 3

¶25

statement of the victim, the learned trial Court vide impugned judgment dated 31.03.2018 has convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforestated. This Court has gone through the evidence and material placed on record and from the appreciation of the same, it is quite vivid that the finding recorded by the learned trial Court cannot be said to be unreasonable and contrary to the evidence brought on record by the prosecution proving the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt, therefore, the finding recorded by the trial Court cannot be said to be perverse, illegal or contrary which warrants interference by this Court.

¶26

In view of the above, the instant appeal stands dismissed on merit.

¶27

Sd/(Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge

¶28

Bhumika

Raghubir Bharti @ Ghurwa v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raghubir Bharti @ Ghurwa v. State of Chhattisgarh

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

Ramesh Tandi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kirtan Dewangan Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Krishna Suresh Kumar Nasha Vs Sonu Sharma

Ved Dev Verma Vs Smt. Pushpadevi Awasthi

Sainik Kumar Kurrey Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vinod Bhardwaj Vs State of Chhattisgarh