Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pratap Singh Baghel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 March, 2025
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:14173
1 CRA-4607-2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEVNARAYAN MISHRA
ON THE 20th OF MARCH, 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 4607 of 2023
PRATAP SINGH BAGHEL
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Mr. Shreyash Pandit - Advocate for appellant.
Mr. Arvind Singh - Government Advocate for State.
JUDGMENT
Per: Justice Devnarayan Mishra Learned counsel for the appellant prays for withdrawal of I.A. No.26027 of 2024, an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.
I.A. No.26027 of 2024 stands dismissed as withdrawn.
With the consent of the parties, matter is heard finally at motion stage. This appeal under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by Special Judge (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012) in Special Case No.67 of 2021 dated 13.03.2023 by which the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years with fine Signature Not Verified Signed by: JULIE SINGH Signing time: 25-03-2025 11:04:59 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:14173 2 CRA-4607-2023 of Rs.1,000/-, under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years with fine amount of Rs.2,000/-, under Section 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/- with default stipulations.
2. In nutshell the prosecution case before the trial Court was that victim, who at the time of the incident was of 16 years and 11 months, was found missing from her house on 10.04.2018. A missing person report was lodged at Police Station Ajaygarh, District-Panna, on that basis, missing person report vide number 01 of 2018 was registered and an offence under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code against the unknown person was registered as Crime No.121 of 2018. Victim was recovered on 15.09.2018 from the custody of the appellant. She was medically examined. Her statements under Sections 161 and 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were recorded and it was found that the appellant abducted the victim and committed rape upon her, hence the appellant was arrested. He was medically examined. After investigation, charge-sheet was submitted before the Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and on commitment, transfer the case before the Special Judge (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012).
3. The trial Court framed the charges under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)
(n) of the Indian Penal Code and 5L/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 read with Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The appellant abjured the guilt and prayed for trial.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: JULIE SINGH Signing time: 25-03-2025 11:04:59NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:14173 3 CRA-4607-2023
4. Trial Court recorded the statements of the prosecution witnesses and examined the appellant under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and after hearing both the parties, passed the impugned judgment and convicted the appellant and sentenced as stated in para No.1 of the judgment, hence, this appeal.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that it is a clear case of consent. The victim for a time period along with her parents were being at Mathura where, the appellant was also working and thereafter, love affair developed between both of them. They were talking with each other on mobile phone and the victim herself had called the appellant to her village. Victim was a major and no case for kidnapping, abduction or rape is made out against the appellant.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant has also submitted that the prosecution miserably failed to prove that the victim was minor as on the date of incident. She has stated that her age is 19 years and just after the incident, she got married. In paragraph no.11 of her cross-examination, she has admitted that she never went to the school.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant has also argued that the Teacher Ramji Agnihotri (PW-3) has admitted that when the victim was admitted in the school, no proof of date of birth was taken from the parents of the victim the date of birth of the victim was recorded on the basis of statements of the parents whatever they told at the time of admission. No admission form was taken from the parents of the victim and also failed to explain, who came in the school to get the admission of the victim in the school and also admitted Signature Not Verified Signed by: JULIE SINGH Signing time: 25-03-2025 11:04:59 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:14173 4 CRA-4607-2023 in the admission register at serial no.6, it is mentioned as she was admitted in 21.07.2018 and date of birth of another girl is mentioned as 01.01.2007 and has denied the suggestion that he has forged the school admission register in the influence of Police Authorities.
8. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the father of the victim (PW-5) has stated that he has five issues, three girls and two boys. When his wife got pregnant, no health card was issued by Anganwadi and also denied the suggestion that the date of birth of the victim was recorded by the Village Chowkidar and he has not informed the Village Chowkidar to mark the date of birth of his daughter. He also express his inability to mention the day, month and year birth of his daughter and stated that on the basis of ration card, her name was recorded in the school and has also stated that he is unable to express whether the age of the victim was recorded in the school record on the basis of ration card or on estimation but denied the fact that the victim at the time of incident was major and admitted that she had not submitted mark-sheet and Aadhar Card of the victim to the Police Authorities but admitted that she along with his family went Mathura for the labour work.
9. In the cross-examination of the mother of the victim (PW-6), she has expressed her inability to mention the exact date of her marriage and stated that after three years of her marriage, in the intervals of 02-03 years, her children were born and on that basis, it is submitted that the trial Court has wrongly concluded the age of the victim below 18 years of age, as doctor Akansha Rajput (PW-7) has clearly stated that the victim was fully Signature Not Verified Signed by: JULIE SINGH Signing time: 25-03-2025 11:04:59 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:14173 5 CRA-4607-2023 developed. She with her own volition accompanied the appellant. No case for conviction is made out, hence, the appeal be allowed and the judgement of conviction and sentence be quashed.
10. Mr. Arvind Singh, learned counsel for the State has submitted that the trial Court has properly recorded the findings regarding the minority of the victim and the consent of the victim has no legal value, hence, there is no substance in the appeal and the appeal be dismissed.
11. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
12. From the statement of the victim and her parents, it is clear that victim along with her parents went to Mathura and they were working as a labourer there, in between, the appellant came into contact of the victim and that the appellant and the victim exchanged their mobile numbers. When the victim returned to her native village, they were in the continuous contact through mobile phone and as per the statement of the victim herself, she narrated that the appellant and the victim were liking each other and the victim accompanied him on the motorcycle from Lavkush Nagar, Chhatarpur to Mathura and stayed with the appellant there.
13. There is no allegation that the appellant used any force or threatened the victim. In paragraph no.7 of the cross-examination, it is clear that she went from her house to canal by her own will without any coercion and it took 10-15 minutes and on his motorcycle, she went along with the appellant to Lavkush Nagar where both of them left motorcycle. When the appellant reached at Lavkush Nagar, the victim was standing near a tree, the appellant went to return the motorcycle from whom he had taken. Other Signature Not Verified Signed by: JULIE SINGH Signing time: 25-03-2025 11:04:59 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:14173 6 CRA-4607-2023 persons were passing there but she did not raise any alarm that she had been abducted by the appellant. In bus from which she went from Lavkush Nagar, other passengers were also travelling in that, and they also changed the bus. The victim wait in the bus stand but she neither took any help nor called any Police Authorities or raised any alarm. In the Mathura Bus Stand, the appellant leaving the victim alone, went to brought a motorcycle and it took more than five minutes but she did not take any help, thus, it is a clear that the victim on her own volition, accompanied the appellant.
14. The material fact is that whether the victim was minor or major? As argued above, the parents of the victim i.e. father (PW-5) and mother (PW-6) in the examination-in-chief have stated that the victim was minor at the time of the incident but both of them failed to tell the exact date of birth of the victim. They also failed to remember when their marriage was solemnized. They also failed to show any document regarding the treatment when the mother of the victim was pregnant, the record of the hospital, record of the Village Kotwar, record of the Village Panchayat or birth certificate issued by the authorities and her father has clearly stated that he is unable to explain on what basis, the date of birth in the school record was marked. The school teacher (PW-3) has also stated that no document was submitted when the victim was admitted in the school and has stated that on the basis of the statements of the parents, the age was recorded, and the condition of the parents was that they were not in a position, to tell the exact date and year of birth of the victim.
15. The prosecution also failed to prove the school mark-sheet as Signature Not Verified Signed by: JULIE SINGH Signing time: 25-03-2025 11:04:59 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:14173 7 CRA-4607-2023 required under Section 94 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Birad Mal Singhvi Vs. Anand Purohit, 1988 (Supp) Supreme Court 604 particularly, in paragraph nos.14 and 15. Prosecution failed to prove that the date of birth of the victim. It is clear that the prosecution failed to prove that the victim at the time of the incident was minor and it shall be presumed that the victim was major at the time of the incident, as just after her, she was apprehended and married with another boy and thus, the appellant is entitled for benefit of doubt.
16. Looking to the above facts and circumstances, the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the victim was minor at the time of incident and thus, offence of kidnapping and abduction is not proved as the victim was a consenting. Thus, the conviction recorded by the trial Court against the appellant is quashed as a result, the sentence imposed by the trial Court under Sections 363, 366 and 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code is quashed. With the aforesaid observations, appeal is allowed.
17. If the appellant is not required in any other case, the appellant be released forthwith and the fine amount, if deposited by the appellant be refunded to him.
18. The order of the trial Court for disposal of the case property is affirmed.
19. With the copy of judgment, the record of the trial Court be returned back.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: JULIE SINGH Signing time: 25-03-2025 11:04:59 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:14173 8 CRA-4607-2023 (VIVEK AGARWAL) (DEVNARAYAN MISHRA) JUDGE JUDGE julie Signature Not Verified Signed by: JULIE SINGH Signing time: 25-03-2025 11:04:59