The Chhattisgarh High Court has refused to interfere with the acquittal of a man accused of rape and unnatural sexual intercourse, holding that the material on record showed the parties had remained in a long-term live-in relationship and that the prosecution failed to establish the allegations beyond doubt. The Division Bench dismissed the victim's appeal at the admission stage itself, affirming the trial court's findings.
Background of the Case
The appeal challenged a June 24, 2025 judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Raipur, which had acquitted the accused of charges under Sections 376(2)(k)(n) and 377 of the Indian Penal Code.
According to the prosecution, the complainant alleged that she entered into a physical relationship with the accused after he assured her that he would marry her. She later claimed that he refused to marry her and also alleged an incident of non-consensual unnatural sexual intercourse. The FIR was registered on December 20, 2022.
Counsel for the appellant argued that the trial court had failed to properly appreciate the evidence and that the accused had induced the complainant into a physical relationship on the assurance of marriage. The respondent, however, maintained that the relationship was consensual and that the acquittal did not warrant appellate interference.
Court's Observations
After examining the evidence, the High Court noted several circumstances that supported the trial court's conclusions.
The Bench observed that the complainant was around 40 years old, well-educated, and had remained in a relationship with the accused for more than three years. During cross-examination, she admitted that the parties had lived together in a live-in relationship for nearly two years and had agreed that marriage would take place only with the consent of both families.
The Court also noted that the complainant's brother stated that the relationship had developed out of mutual affection, while the doctor who examined the complainant did not find injuries or receive any complaint suggesting force or unnatural sexual acts.
Referring to the Supreme Court's decision in Ravish Singh Rana v. State of Uttarakhand, the Bench observed:
“If two able-minded adults reside together as a live-in couple for more than a couple of years and cohabit with each other, a presumption would arise that they voluntarily chose that kind of a relationship fully aware of its consequences.”
The High Court further observed that the evidence indicated the relationship between the parties was consensual and that the prosecution had not produced sufficient material to establish the allegations made against the accused.
Court's Decision
Finding no illegality, perversity, or miscarriage of justice in the trial court's judgment, the Division Bench upheld the acquittal.
The Court observed,
“The learned trial Court has not committed any infirmity, illegality, perversity, or miscarriage of justice in passing the judgment of acquittal, warranting interference by this Court.”
Accordingly, it affirmed the acquittal and dismissed the victim's appeal at the admission stage.
Case Details
Case Title: XYZ v. Siddharth Sarangi & Another
Case Number: ACQA No. 380 of 2025
Judge: Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal and Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas
Decision Date: 29 June 2026
 Department-300x169.webp)
