The Chhattisgarh High Court has reaffirmed the importance of the concept of a “sterling witness” in criminal jurisprudence, observing that such a witness must be of high caliber and unassailable credibility, whose testimony alone can form the basis for conviction. The observation was made by Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha while dismissing an appeal against conviction in CRA No. 1533 of 2023.
Background
The appeal was filed by Rohit Kalar, a 29-year-old resident of Village Dhodha, District Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai, challenging his conviction and sentence under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Section 9(m)(u) read with Section 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. The conviction had been recorded by the Special Additional Sessions Judge, Khairagarh, in Special Session Case No. 03/2022.
The trial court had sentenced Kalar to five years’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of ₹1,000 under each of the above provisions, directing that both sentences run concurrently.
Case Details
As per the prosecution, on November 28, 2021, the victim’s mother lodged a complaint stating that her two-year-and-ten-month-old daughter was playing at her aunt’s house when the appellant lured her with money and later took her toward his house. A neighbor, Ramsahayata Verma, witnessed the accused removing both his and the minor’s clothes near a cowshed and immediately intervened, bringing the child back home.
An FIR was registered under Crime No. 254/2021 at Gandai Police Station. During investigation, statements of witnesses, including the minor’s family members, were recorded under Section 164 CrPC. A site map was prepared, and the appellant was arrested. After completion of investigation, a charge sheet was filed.
Arguments
Counsel for the appellant contended that there was no medical report establishing sexual assault and that the accused had been falsely implicated. It was submitted that the appellant had already undergone approximately three years and six months of incarceration and sought the setting aside of the trial court’s order.
The State, represented by Panel Lawyer Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, opposed the appeal, arguing that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and that there was direct eyewitness testimony implicating the appellant.
Court’s Observations
The Court framed the issue as whether the testimony of the victim and key witnesses was reliable and sufficient to uphold the conviction. Citing Rai Sandeep @ Deenu v. State of NCT of Delhi, (2012) 8 SCC 21, the Court emphasized:
“The ‘sterling witness’ should be of a very high quality and caliber whose version should, therefore, be unassailable. The Court considering the version of such witness should be in a position to accept it for its face value without any hesitation.”
The Court further referred to State of H.P. v. Shree Kant Shekar (2004) 8 SCC 153 and Shivasharanappa v. State of Karnataka (2013) 5 SCC 705, reiterating that credible testimony of child victims or sexual assault survivors does not require corroboration if found truthful and consistent.
It noted that the victim’s grandfather (PW-1), who was an eyewitness, gave a direct and consistent account of the incident. His version was corroborated by the victim’s mother (PW-3) and the investigating officer (PW-10). The Court also took note of the strong objections raised by the victim’s mother, who appeared through the District Legal Services Authority in response to the appellant’s plea.
Decision
Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha concluded that the prosecution had proved the charges beyond all reasonable doubt. The trial court’s reliance on the consistent, credible testimony of witnesses — particularly the sterling witness PW-1 — was upheld:
“I do not find any illegality and irregularity in the findings recorded by the trial Court.”
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction and sentence awarded by the Special Additional Sessions Judge, Khairagarh.
Case Title: Rohit Kalar vs State of Chhattisgarh
Case No.: CRA No. 1533 of 2023
