;"I'<^"^ ^•' Crf^f 43^0 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGA^H AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. HON'BLE SHRI R.L. JHANWAR, J. Appellant AppSicant Respondent M.Cr.C. (PR) No. 3133 of 2005 State of Chhattisgarh, Through : P.S. - Pamgarh, Distt. Janjgir- Champa, (Chhattisgarh). VERSUS Shashikant Patel, S/o. Ramshesh Patel, aged about 25 years, Occupation : Contract Teacher, R/o. Village - Beltukri, P.S. Masturi, distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) ApDSication for arant of leave to aDDeal U/S 378 (3) and memo of appeal u/s 378 (1) of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 Present: Shri Akhil Mishra, learned Depyty Government Advocate, for the State/petitioner. ORDER (06thJuly, 2010) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, CJ. Shri Akhil Mishra, learned Deputy Government Advocate is heard on the question of grant of leave to appeal against the acquittal of respondenV accused Shashikant Patet. 2) Police Pamgarh, District Janjgir-Champa, after completion of the investigation of the case registered on the report of the prosecutrix charge-sheeted respondenV accused Shashikant Patel for the alleged commission of the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, on the accusatiort of his ^-^..... ^ •^^^^''•^, ^ ?TasS I JJ having committed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix without her consent and against her will during the period of about one year, in 2003-2004. 3) Respondent/ accused Shashikant Patel abjured his guilt and pleaded false implication to the charge framed by the trial Court under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. 4) The trial Court on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led by the prosecution at the triai in general and that of the prosecutrix in particular found that the prosecutrix on the date of the first alleged act of sexual intercourse was aged more than 16 years; the prosecutrix admitted an affair between her and the accused; the conduct ofthe prosecutrix during the entire period of one year was indicative of her tacit consent in the entire episode. On the above findings, the trial Court acquitted the respondent/ accused vide impugned judgment dated 30.05.2005. 5) Shri Akhil Mishra, learned Deputy Government Advocate vehemently argued that the trial Court has erred in discarding the evidence of the prosecutrix on flimsy and untenable grounds. 6) For establishing the age of the prosecutrix, her birth certificate and school certjficate were produced by the prosecution at the trial. In her birth certificate her date of birth was shown as 24-05-1987, whereas in her school certificate, the date of birth shown was 08-06-1986. As such, both the certificates produced by the prosecution established the age of the prosecutrix as more than 16 years on the date of the first alleged act of sexual intercourse by the accused. The prosecutrix :i^^^^r^^^!i^^ / in her cross-examination admitted that there was an affair between her and the accused and in the hope that the accused would marry her she never resisted the commission of sexual intercourse with her by the accused. 7) On due consideration of the submissions of learned Deputy Government Advocate; the findings recorded by the trial Court leading to acquittal of respondent / accused Shashikant Patel; and the above mentioned broad features of the case, we are satisfied that the findings recorded by the trial Court leading to acquittal of respondent / accused Shashikant Patel, do not suffer from any infjrmity whatsoever. 8) Mere possibility of another view on the prosecution evidence will not by itself be a sufficient ground to warrant interference in an appeal against acquittal. 9) We, therefore, do not find any good ground for grant of leave to appeal against the acquittal of respondent/ accused Shashikant Patel. 10) The petition filed by the petitioner/ State under Section 378 (3) of Cr.P.C., therefore, fails and is hereby dismissed. _-—- Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.L. Jhanwar Judge subbu