Judgment

VENKATARAMIAH, J. :- This appeal by special leave is filed against the judgment dated Sept. 17, 1974 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 579 of 1969 on the file of the High Court of Patna confirming the conviction of the appellant of the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Penal Code and the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for five years imposed on him on Dec. 20, 1969 in Sessions Trial No. 107 of 1968 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Judge at Purnea in the State of Bihar.

2. The appellant was committed to face the trial for an offence punishable under Section 376 of the Penal Code by the order of the Munsiff-Magistrate, Ist Class, Purnea on the basis of a complaint filed by the complainant Barki Devi (P. W. 3) before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Purnea on Aug. 9, 1968 who took cognizance of the offence and transferred the case to the file of the aforesaid Magistrate.

3. The allegations made in the complaint are briefly these : That on August 7, 1968 at about 5.00 P. M. the complainant, who was a married woman of about 25 years, was engaged in the work of uprooting of the paddy seedlings on her field situated on the southern side of her house in Dhumra Badh situated in Mouza Dhamdaha, Police Station Dhamdaha, District Purnea. There was a canal to the east of the field and there were no houses nearby. When she was working on her field the appellant came near her and started cutting jokes and suggested that she should have sexual intercourse with him. On the complainant protesting at his suggestion, the appellant suddenly caught hold of her, threw her down on the ground removed her clothes and committed rape on her. On hearing her cry for help, some persons arrived at the place. The appellant immediately ran away. Thereafter the complainant went to her house and narrated the incident to her husband, Jitrai (P. W. 4). The complainant and her husband then went to the local Mukhiya who asked them to file a complaint in the Court. Then they went to the police thana to give information about the crime but the police office declined to record the information as the appellant was an influential person. Then the complainant went to the Court on August 8, 1968 to lodge a complaint but as the time for lodging complaint was over by the time the complaint was drafted, she filed it on August 9, 1968 in the Court. The complaint contained the names of some witnesses.

4. At the trial the complainant was examined as P. W. 3. She belongs to the Santhal tribe. In her evidence she described the incident as disclosed in her complaint. She stated that the appellant forcibly had sexual intercourse with her against her will. She stated that on hearing her cry, Sheikh Lafid (P. W. 1) came there and on seeing him, the appellant ran away. She also stated that she narrated the incident to Juman Nadaf (P. W. 2), Chanda Kisku and Makbool who also came there and that she showed the stains of semen on her clothes and also the trampling marks on the ground to them. She also stated that she narrated the incident before her husband and the Mukhiya of the village. She further stated that when she and her husband went to the police station, they were threatened and driven away by the police officer there. She also told about her going to Purnea and lodging the complaint. Sheikh Lafid (P. W. 1) corroborated the evidence of the complainant by deposing that when he reached the scene of occurrence he saw the appellant lying on top of the body of the complainant. Juman Nadaf (P.W. 2) stated that when he went near the scene of occurrence he saw the appellant fleeing away from there. He stated that the complainant had narrated before him the details of the crime committed by the appellant. Jitrai (P. W. 4) the husband of the complainant stated that in the evening of the day of occurrence the complainant told him about the manner in which she had been ravished by the appellant and also gave evidence about his going to the Mukhiya and to the police stati