Xyz Vs State of Chhattisgarh

questioning the legality and propriety of the judgment dated 22/01/2026 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Ramanujganj, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj in Session Trial Case No.108/2022, whereby, the respondent No.2- Saifi Alam has been acquitted with regard to the offence punishable under Sections 452, 376(2)(n) and Section 323 of IPC.

¶24

From perusal of the record, it appears that the respondent No.2- Saifi Alam has been charge-sheeted with regard to the aforesaid offence based upon the written report (Ex.P/1) lodged by the appellant/victim on 26/03/2022, wherein, it was alleged that the said respondent while alluring her on the pretext of marriage has committed sexual intercourse with her and refused subsequently to marry with her.

¶25

Perusal of the alleged report (Ex.P/1) would show that the marriage of the appellant/victim was solemnized with one Mohammad Khurshid Alam sometimes in the year, 2009, and because of her relation with the respondent No.2- Saifi Alam, he has not kept her along with him and had divorced her and, since then, she is living separately and came in contact with the said respondent, who while alluring her on the pretext of marriage has committed sexual intercourse with her. It, thus, appears from her alleged report that she was a married lady and, according to her allegation, the said respondent on 11/07/2012 entered into her house in the night around 08:00

¶26

3

¶27

PM and committed sexual intercourse while alluring her on the pretext of marriage. Perusal of her (PW-1) evidence would show that, a divorce was taken place in accordance with her customary law and papers to this effect was available with her but the same has, however, not been placed on record. In absence thereof, it can not be said that the alleged divorce was made as alleged by her. It is to be seen further, as revealed from para 3 of her brother’s (PW-2) testimony that the alleged of her relation with the respondent was informed to him by her that it was made on her own wish.

¶28

Pertinently to be noted here further, as revealed from para 20 of her statement, that the alleged report (Ex. P/1) was lodged on 26/03/2022, i.e., much after passing of the considerable period of more than 10 years and, that too only when the marriage of the respondent No.2- Saifi Alam was fixed with someone else.

¶29

In view of the aforesaid background, it is, thus, evident that the alleged relations were made between them voluntarily and it is not in dispute that the appellant/victim was major at the time when the alleged relation was developed and, the first act of sexual intercourse between them was alleged to have been made on 11/07/2012 and that too in her own house and throughout the prolonged period of more than 10 years, she was kept completely silent about the alleged sexual assault

¶30

4

¶31

meted out to her by the respondent No.2- Saifi Alam and has lodged the alleged written report (Ex.P/1) only when she came to know that his marriage was fixed with someone else. Her alleged prolonged relation with him was, thus, consensual in nature and, the Supreme Court in the matter of Mahesh Damu Khare v. State of Maharashtra , reported in (2024) 11 SCC 398 has held that where the woman knowingly maintains the physical relationship for a prolonged period, then, it cannot be said with certainty that it was made purely because of promise of marriage and we are, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the impugned judgment of his acquittal passed by the trial Court holding that the alleged relation of her with him was consensual in nature.

¶32

The appeal being devoid of merit is, accordingly, dismissed at the admission stage itself.

¶33

Sd/Sd/-

¶34

(Sanjay S. Agrawal ) (Narendra Kumar Vyas ) JUDGE JUDGE

¶35

Prashant

Xyz v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Xyz v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Xyz Vs Kamdev Burman

Mahendra Dhimar Vs Gannu Dhimar

Xyz Vs State of Chhattisgarh

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Ashish Singh Kachwaha @ Chhotu

State Of Chhattisgarh Vs Dev Kumar Gond

Abc (Victim) Vs State of Chhattisgarh