HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Coram : Hon’ble Shri Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh and Hon’ble Shri R.L.Jhanwar, JJ Cr. Appeal No. 393061 ‘ Appellant : State af Chhattisgarh Versus Sarjukol alias Chhotani. aged abcut 19 years, sfo Jagdish Kol, resident of Madhu Daffai Ledari, P.S. \Manendragarh, District Korea. AEPLICATION FOR GRANT OF LEAVE TO APPEAL UNDER SECTIGN 378 i3) CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE & MEMO OF APPEAL UNDER SECTION 373 (1} OF THE CODE OF CRiMlNAL PROCEDURE Present : AppeHantISmte by $hri Nilendu Naha Roy, P.L. Respandent absent. Resgondent ORAL JUDGMENT (Passed on 29m Jung, 2009) The foitowing oral judgment of the Couw was delivered by Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh, J. This appeai arises of the judgment dated 26.08.2000 detivered in Sessions Case No. 335/99 whereby the respondent — 5arju Kot @ Chhotani was acquitted of the charge under Section 363. 366 and 37’6 of the LP.C. 2. The appeai was admitted fer hearing on 09.01.2001. Baiiable warrant at arrest issued against the respondent has returned with the endorsement that the respondent has Ieft his place ef abode and his address is not known. 3. On merits, learned P.L. for the State/appeiiant has very frankiy submitted that he is not able to point out any illegaiity or manifest error of \ a r \ \ !aw in the impugned judgment whereby the respondent wa$ acquitted under Section 363.366 and 376 of the l.P.C. 4. We have atsa perused the impugned judgment. In paragraph 9. the learned Additional Sessions Judge was justified in drawing a presumption that the possibility that the age of the prosecutrix was between 17 te 20 years could not be ruled out. The learned trial Judge further considered the fact that the prosecutrtx has eloped with the respondent on the mete allegation that the respondent had threatened to kill her mother. However, this material fact was omitted by the prosecutrix in her statement under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. The learned trial Judge has atso considered the fact that the prosecutrix had moved with the respondent from Manendragarh to Baikunthpur and from there to Anuppur and Seoni and has induiged in sex with him. We are thus of the considered opinion that the acquittal of the respondent is well merited and does not call for any interference. in this View of the matter, no useful purpose will be served in keeping this appeal pending. 5. in the result. the appeal is dismissed white maintaining the acquittal of the respondent under Section 363, 366 and 376 of the l.P.C. . Sdl- R.L. Jhanwar Judge Sdl-r DILIP RAOSAHEB DESHMUKH Judge ‘[ l‘