Allowed¶44

Nirmal Kumar Varandani v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC10 Sept 2025CRA/17/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court, Bilaspur; CRA No. 17 of 2022; Nirmal Kumar Varandani v. State of Chhattisgarh; decided 11/09/2025 by Deepak Kumar Tiwari, J.; NAFR (non-reportable); neutral citation 2025:CGHC:46477. Acquittal on benefit of doubt; setting aside conviction under Ss.363, 366, 376(2) IPC; insufficiency of evidence; possibility of false implication; victim's version not fully relied upon; medical evidence unsupported; S.164 CrPC statement; S.374(2) CrPC appeal; S.437-A CrPC bail bonds.

What did the court decide?

Conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant under Sections 363, 366 and 376(2) IPC set aside; appellant acquitted of the said charges by extending benefit of doubt; appellant on bail need not surrender; bail bonds to remain in operation for 6 months under Section 437-A CrPC. ¶44

Nirmal Kumar Varandani Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Bail and Remand | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶44

Issue for consideration

Whether the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant by the Additional Sessions Judge, first Fast Track Special Court, Raipur under Sections 363, 366 and 376(2) IPC should be upheld or set aside. +1 more

¶32

Ratio / Principle

Possibility of false implication of the appellant cannot be ruled out, in the absence of any clinching evidence on record to connect the appellant with the crime in question.

¶42

Key takeaways

From the attending circumstances the Court is not in a position to fully rely on the version of the victim, and the trial Court wrongly convicted the accused/appellant for the aforesaid offences.ratio¶43
The medical evidence did not support the version of the victim girl; she admitted there was no injury after the incident and the doctor (PW-5) found no such injury in her report (Ex.-P/10).ratio¶41

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal appeal under S.374(2) CrPC allowed; conviction and sentence under Ss.363, 366 & 376(2) IPC (RI of 2, 3 and 10 years with fines) set aside and appellant acquitted by extending benefit of doubt. The High Court (Deepak Kumar Tiwari, J.) held that in the absence of clinching evidence connecting the appellant with the alleged rape of a minor girl, possibility of false implication could not be ruled out: the place of incident was not traced and no spot map was filed; the FIR did not mention that the appellant had given his mobile number to the victim (a fact disclosed only in her S.164 CrPC statement); medical examination disclosed no injury and no definite opinion of recent sexual intercourse; and the defence proved calls made from the victim's mobile through DW-1, an executive of the service provider, supporting the plea of demand of money and threat of false implication. The Court could not fully rely on the version of the victim. Bail bonds directed to remain in operation for six months under S.437-A CrPC; appellant need not surrender.

2025:CGHC:46477

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

CRA No. 17 of 2022

¶6

1 - Nirmal Kumar Varandani S/o Shri Parimal Das @ Shankar Lal Varandani Aged About 30 Years R/o House No. A /1, Sindhu Vatika, Opposite Maruti Residency, Amlidih, P.S. Rajendra Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶7

... Appellant

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The S.H.O. P.S. G.R.P. District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶10

... Respondent(s)

¶11

For Appellant : Miss Anamika Jain appears on behalf of Shri Devershi Thakur, Advocate.

¶12

For Respondent(s) : Shri SK Puriya, Panel Lawyer.

¶13

Hon'ble Shri Deepak Kumar Tiwari, J

¶14

Judgment on Board

¶15

11/09/2025 :

¶16

This Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 (2) of the CrPC is directed against the judgment dated 9.12.2021 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, first Fast Track Special Court, Raipur in Special Criminal Case No.163/2018 whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under :-

¶17

Digitally signed by KRISHNA KRISHNA KUMAR KUMAR BARVE BARVE Date: 2025.09.11 17:31:00 +0530

¶18

Conviction Sentence Under Section 363 of the RI for 2 years with a fine of

¶19

¶20

IPC	Rs.500	/-
Under Section 366 of the IPC	RI for Rs.1,00	3 years with a fine of 0/-
Under Section 376 (2) (>) of the IPC	RI for Rs.5,00	10 years with a fine of 0/-
	In def under appella additio & 3 mo	ault of payment of fine the above Sections, the nt is directed to undergo nal RI of 15 days, 1 month nths respectively.

¶21

The prosecution case, in brief, is that Surbhi Soni (PW-1), Coordinator of Railway Child Help Desk, Raipur filed a written complaint at the Police Station GRP, Raipur on 28^th July, 2018 stating that the victim minor girl ‘M’, (PW-2), aged about 15 years, left her home situated at village ‘K-Mal’, District Raigarh, as her father was a heavily drunkard person. So the victim without informing her father or anyone in the village reached Raipur through Train and met her friend (PW-3) Mannuram Yadav. The said friend of the victim girl has made arrangement for stay in the room of one of his girlfriend ‘J’ in the night of 24^th July, 2018. On the next day, the victim again called her friend ‘M’ on 25^th July, 2018, who advised her to return to home, on which the victim reached Bilaspur through train, however, she missed her train for Raigarh and she again reached Raipur and called her friend (PW-3). The mobile of PW-3 was switched off and one unknown person took the victim girl on his vehicle in a dilapidated house and threatened to kill her and on the point of knife committed forceful sexual intercourse. After half an hour, the victim girl was dropped at the Railway Station Raipur. The

¶22

¶23

victim girl then called her friend (PW-3) and thereafter both of them had gone to Kanker where the Police Personnel have caught them. When mother of the victim informed about the situation to the Kanker Police, they advised PW-3 & PW-2 to return to Raipur. Thereafter, the victim girl was brought to the Police Station GRP Raipur and in turn, the Police personnel have handed over the victim girl to the Railway Child Line.

¶24

Based on such information, FIR (Ex.-P/2) was registered against unknown person aged about 21-22 years on 28^th July, 2018 at GRP, Raipur. Statement of the victim girl was recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC vide Ex.-P/6 wherein the victim girl disclosed that the accused/appellant had also given his mobile number to her when he dropped the victim at Raipur Railway Station after the incident. On such information, the accused/ appellant was apprehended and his memorandum statement has been recorded vide Ex.-P/7. Motorcycle and mobile of the accused were seized vide Ex.-P/8.

¶25

The victim girl was subjected to medical examination by Dr. Rajni Chourasiya (PW-5), who gave her report Ex.-P/10 wherein she did not find any internal or external injury and she had not given any definite opinion about recent sexual intercourse. The appellant was also medically examined by Dr. VK Jha (PW-7) vide Ex.-P/14 wherein it was opined that the appellant is capable to perform sexual intercourse. One mobile and social status certificate of the victim were seized vide Ex.-P/21.

¶26

¶27

The tower location of both the mobiles has been obtained from the service provider by sending a letter vide Ex.-P/15. Identification parade was conducted by the Executive Magistrate (PW-8) Srijan Sonkar vide Ex.-P/5 and the victim has identified the appellant as the person who committed sexual intercourse with her in the intervening night of 25^th /26^th July, 2018. The school admission register was seized vide Ex.-P/12, which is proved by (PW-6) SK Patel, Headmaster of the School, wherein the date of birth of the victim has been recorded as 10.2.2005.

¶28

Statements of the witnesses were recorded. After completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed. The accused/appellant abjured his guilt and claimed to be tried.

¶29

In order to bring home the charges, the prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses and exhibited 25 documents. In the statement recorded under Section 313 of the CrPC, the appellant has taken a specific plea that he has been falsely implicated and examined himself as DW-2 and one Executive of the service provider of his mobile namely, (DW-1) Pankaj Ramaiyya to prove/establish that on the date of the incident, his wife was hospitalized at Makahara Hospital, Raipur and the victim girl has only sought lift from him and on humanitarian ground, he has extended help to the said victim girl. Thereafter she made various calls to rope the appellant in a false case and also demanded money.

¶30

¶31

The trial Court after appreciating the evidence available on record convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned above.

¶32

Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the trial Court has not appreciated the evidence in proper perspective and therefore the impugned judgment may be set aside and the appellant may be acquitted of the said charges.

¶33

Per contra, learned State Counsel would support the impugned judgment.

¶34

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the records with utmost circumspection.

¶35

Admittedly, the victim girl, as per the case of the prosecution, left her home on account of certain domestic issues, particularly on account of the fact that her father was a drunkard person and as such, without informing her father or any person in the village, the victim reached Raipur and met one of her friend (PW-3) and the said friend (PW-3) has arranged for stay of the victim girl in the night of 24^th July, 2018 in the room of his friend Jageshwari (not examined). On the next day, the friend of the victim advised her to return to home. Though the victim has reached Bilaspur from Raipur, however, she missed her further connecting train and again returned to Raipur. On the said date, the alleged incident has taken place. However, the place where the incident has happened was not mentioned as the location has not been traced and the spot map has also not been filed.

¶36

¶37

When a specific query is put to learned State Counsel, he fairly admits that no such document is available on record.

¶38

Even after the incident, the victim girl had gone along with her friend (PW-3) to Kanker and did not inform her friend about the incident. In Kanker, the police has caught PW-2 & PW-3 and advised them to return to home. Thereafter the victim girl with the help of Coordinator of Railway Child Line lodged an FIR (Ex.-P/2), wherein she has not mentioned the fact that the appellant has also given his mobile number to her after committing the crime at the time of dropping her at the Railway Station, and the said fact has been disclosed by the victim girl in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC.

¶39

The accused/appellant has taken a specific defence that the victim girl has met him and sought help for the lift and also expressed her difficulties to him. So only on humanitarian ground, he has extended help to the victim. While examining himself, the accused/appellant has deposed that from the mobile of the victim girl several calls have been received by him from 27^th July, 2018 to 28^th July, 2018. In the said calls, money has been demanded, and the victim girl has also extended threat to implicate him in a false case. Thereafter present FIR has been lodged by the victim girl on 28^th July, 2018. The accused/appellant has duly proved the calls which have been made from the mobile of the victim girl to his mobile by examining one of the Executives of the service provider namely, (DW-1) Pankaj Ramaiyya.

¶40

¶41

The medical evidence has also not supported the version of the victim girl. The victim herself has admitted that there was no injury after the incident on her body and (PW-5) doctor has also not found any such injury in her report (Ex.-P/10).

¶42

Taking into consideration the aforesaid evidence, particularly considering that defence which was taken by the appellant, this Court is of the opinion that possibility of false implication of the appellant cannot be ruled out, in the absence of any clinching evidence on record to connect the appellant with the crime in question.

¶43

Moreover, from the attending circumstances, this Court is not in a position to fully rely on the version of the victim and as such, the trial Court has wrongly convicted the accused/appellant for the aforesaid offence.

¶44

In the result, the Appeal is allowed. Conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant under Section 363, 366 & 376 (2)( > ) of the IPC are set aside and he is acquitted of the said charges by extending benefit of doubt. The appellant is on bail. He need not surrender. The bail bonds furnished by the appellant shall remain in operation for a period of 6 months from today in view of the provisions contained under Section 437-A of the CrPC.

¶45

Sd/-

¶46

(Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge

¶47

Barve

Nirmal Kumar Varandani v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nirmal Kumar Varandani 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

Aarifa Khan Vs Sheikh Shahid

Anish Ahmed Khan Vs Gulam Nabi Qureshi

Jitendra Kumar Lahare Vs Yashwant Chandravanshi

Sourabh Gendle Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sumit Jaisawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

J. S. Bhatia Vs Vicky Auto-Mobiles