LexSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH versus SANJAY KUMAR
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 4 S.C.R. 1708 : 2025 INSC 561 State of Himachal Pradesh v. Sanjay Kumar (Criminal Appeal No(s). 595 of 2016) 23 April 2025 [Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Prashant Kumar Mishra,* JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court was justified in setting aside the conviction and sentence of the accused-A1 u/ss.363, 366, 376 and 201 r/w s.34, IPC and accused-A2 u/s.201 r/w s.34 and acquitting them. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – ss.363, 366, 376, 201 r/w s.34 – High Court set aside the conviction and sentence of accused-A1 u/ss.363, 366, 376 and 201 r/w s.34, IPC and accused-A2 u/s.201 r/w s.34 and acquitted them – Correctness: Held: Acquittal not interfered with – FIR was lodged regarding the abduction of the Prosecutrix, there is no allegation of rape in the FIR – There is material contradiction in the statement of the Prosecutrix as to the date of commission of rape – Since A1 was not with the Prosecutrix in the night of 31.03.2012 when she was in the house of co-accused-A2 and there is no allegation of rape against A2 in whose house she stayed on the next night, the High Court rightly held that the commission of rape by A1 is not proved – View taken by the High Court is plausible considering the evidence on record – Prosecution failed to establish the charges against the accused. [Paras 9-11] List of Acts Penal Code,1860; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. List of Keywords Commission of rape not proved; Kidnapping; Acquittal not interfered with; Material contradiction in statement of prosecutrix; * Author [2025] 4 S.C.R. 1709 State of Himachal Pradesh v. Sanjay Kumar No allegation of rape in the FIR; Section 164 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973; Date of commission of offence; Medical evidence; DNA profile. Case Arising From CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 595 of 2016 From the Judgment and Order dated 28.12.2015 of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla in CRLA No. 4246 of 2013 With Criminal Appeal No. 596 of 2016 Appearances for Parties Advs. for the Appellant: Divyanshu Kumar Srivastava, Yash Jain, Ravi Bakshi, S. Gowthaman. Advs. for the Respondent: Sumesh Dhawan, Ms. Ankita Bajpai, Mrs. Vatsala Kak, Ms. Kholi Rakuzhuro, Mrs. Priya Puri, Raghav Dembla. Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court Judgment Prashant Kumar Mishra, J. 1. These appeals would call in question, the impugned Judgment of acquittal dated 28.12.2015 passed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla in Criminal Appeal No. 4246 of 2013 and Criminal Appeal No. 4273 of 2013 setting aside the conviction and sentence of accused/Sanjay Kumar under Sections 363, 366, 376 and 201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code,1860,1 and accused/ Chaman Shukla under Section 201 read with Section 34 IPC imposed by the Sessions Judge, Bilaspur (H.P.) in Sessions Trial No. 8/7 of 2012 arising out of FIR No. 47 of 2012 dated 31.03.2012, registered at P.S. Barmana, District Bilaspur (H.P.). 1 (for short, ‘IPC’) 1710 [2025] 4 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports 2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 30.03.2012, Parkash Chand (PW-5), father of the prosecutrix, was addressing religious story (‘Katha’) in Sri Naina Devi temple at Sohra Buins and his wife Shanta Sharma along with her daughter Tanu Sharma (PW-2) and the prosecutrix aged about 14 years (PW-13) also went to listen the Katha. During Katha, PW-2 asked the prosecutrix to take her son, aged about two years, to bed for sleeping in a room of the temple. After a long time, when the prosecutrix did not return, PW-2 went to the room where she found her son sleeping, but did not find the prosecutrix in the room. Upon this, PW-2 informed her in-laws and others and started searching for the prosecutrix but remained unsuccessful. They raised a suspicion that the accused/Sanjay Kumar had kidnapped the prosecutrix. PW-2 called her husband Narender Shail (PW-1) who made a complaint at the Police Station, Barmana, District Bilaspur and on that basis, FIR was registered. 2.2. On 01.04.2012, accused/Chaman Shukla along with the prosecutrix went to the Police Station Rampur, District Shimla and informed that he had found her walking on the road at Narkanda on 30.03.2012 and brought her to his home. Upon production of the prosecutrix at Police Station, Rampur, a police party of Police Station Barmana, District Bilaspur along with relatives of the prosecutrix reached there and the prosecutrix was handed over to them by entering R
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.