State Of Chhattisgarh v. Pradeep @ Dev

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Chhuriya Police Outpost Chichola, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Pradeep @ Dev S/o Sangam Padwar, Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Danitola, Police Station Ghughri, District Mandla Madhya Pradesh

2. Ramgopal S/o Jeevan Lal Gandharv Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Sadak Banjari, Outpost Chichola, Police Station Chhuriya, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Petitioner/State Mr. SK Mishra, Panel Lawyer DB:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Gautam Chourdiya Order On Board By Prashant Kumar Mishra, J.

31/7/2019

1. Heard on IA No.1, an application for condonation of delay of 61 days in filing the CRMP.

2. On due consideration, the application is allowed and the delay is condoned.

3. Also heard on admission.

4. The trial Court has acquitted the accused of the charges under Sections 363/34, 366/34, 376 (2D)(2G)/34 of IPC, Section 6 read with Section 34 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

5. The father of the prosecutrix lodged an FIR on 24.7.2015 alleging kidnapping of the prosecutrix at about 10:00 p.m. on 23.7.2015. When the prosecutrix was traced, she informed the Police that the accused persons have committed gang rape against her and have also made her to consume alcohol or some intoxicating substance. However, the Medical OfÏcer examining her has not found any injury either external or internal over any part of the body of the prosecutrix or even in her private part. The FSL examination of the vaginal swab/slide has tested negative. Thus, the entire medical evidence is contrary to what the prosecutrix would state against the accused persons.

6. The trial Court has found that the prosecutrix's allegation that the accused persons forcefully kidnapped her is not finding support from independent witnesses PW-3 Samaydas , PW-7 Surajlal Lahre and PW-28 Madan Lal Netam, who had seen the prosecutrix moving alone from her house and proceeding on a motorcycle with another person. There is no evidence that the prosecutix raised any protest or offered resistance at the time she was moving on the motorcycle. It has also been found by the trial Court that the prosecutrix was moving with accused Pradeep @ Dev and had gone again to Raipur with him after

once returning to the village. Thus, the allegation of abduction is also doubtful.

7. Considering the nature and quality of evidence available on record, we are not inclined to grant leave to appeal.

8. The CRMP is dismissed.

Sd/- Sd/- ( Prashant Kumar Mishra) (Gautam Chourdiya) Judge Judge Shyna