Back
2010 (4) Supreme 122
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B. Sudershan Reddy and Aftab Alam, JJ.
Utpal Das & Anr. — Appellants
versus
State of West Bengal — Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 800 of 2007
Decided on : 7-05-2010
Facts of the Case :
Accused appellants were prosecuted herein in the instant case for committing rape on prosecuterix. Trial Court upon consideration of evidence and material available on record held that prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and acquitted all accused of charges framed against them.On State appeal , High Court held that trial court had extended benefit of doubt to appellants under misconception of facts and wrong appreciation of evidence and convicted appellants under Section 376/34 of IPC. However, High Court confirmed acquittal of other accused.
2.Present appeal has been filed against said order of High Court.
Findings of the Court :
The Court held that there was no reason whatsoever to disbelieve evidence of Prosecutrix who meticulously narrated sequence of events as to what transpired on fateful day from 8.00 p.m. onwards till about her lodging first information report on the next day. There was Nothing on record to disbelieve her evidence. On consideration of evidence of prosecution witnesses PW-14 and PW-6, there were no material contradictions in their evidence so as to disbelieve their evidence. The version given by PW-14, (victim) received complete corroboration from the evidence of PW-6. Medical examination report of victim showed that no injuries were found on her private parts or on any part of her body. However since victim was a married grown up lady and blessed with two children , absence of injuries on her private parts was not of much significance. The mere fact that no injuries were found on private parts of her body could not be the ground to hold that she was not subjected to any sexual assault. Again sequence of events clearly apparent from evidence of PW-1, PW-6 and PW-14, leading to sexual assault completely ruled out possibility of consensual sex. Victim made no mistake in identifying two appellants, and based on the evidence of PW-1, PW-6 and victim (PW-14)herself, it was satisfactorily proved that two appellants were actually the persons who committed rape on victim .Appeal having no merit was dismissed.
JUDGMENT
B. Sudershan Reddy, J. —
1.This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the Calcutta High Court setting aside the acquittal of the appellants herein under Section 376 IPC and sentencing them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo two months rigorous imprisonment.
2.The prosecution story, briefly stated, is that on 28.4.1984 at about 8.00 p.m. one Sitarani Jha (PW-14) got down from a train at Burdwan Railway Station alone and hired a rickshaw to go to the Badamtola bus stand as she had to take a bus for Satgachia. On reaching at Badamtola bus stand she learnt that the last bus for Satgachia had already left. She then told the rickshaw puller, Bipul Samaddar (PW-6) to take her to a girl of her village who lived at nearby place, Kalna Gate. It is alleged that when the victim was about to leave Badamtala bus stand she was intercepted by four or five persons who forcibly took her to a house under construction and thereafter two of them forcibly committed rape on her one after another against her will. One of them had a knife in his hands. The victim further alleged that after commission of rape she was taken to a nearby tea stall and locked there in a small room by the appellants. After sometime one Parimal Babu (PW-2), Probal Babu (PW-1) and Bipul Samaddar (PW-6) and some other people rescued her from that shop, to whom she narrated the whole incident. Thereafter the victim took shelter for night in the house of one Joydeb Prajapati (PW-4) a distant relative of her. It is further alleged that on the following morning i.e. 29.4.1984 local people brought Utpal Das (appellant no. 1 herein), Haradhan @ Bhalta Sutradar (appellant no.2 herein) and one Banshidhar Dawn before the victim and she identified Utpal and Haradhan @ Bhalta Sutradhar as the persons who committed rape on her and at that time Haradhan @ Bhalta managed to flee away. This, in fact, is the story given out by the prosecutrix - Sitarani Jha while she lodged the FIR (Ex. 9) with Burdwan (Sadar) Police Station at 10.45 a.m. on 29.4.1984.
3.Based on the report (Ex.9) the Police Station Burdwan registered a case under Sections 366, 368 and 376 read with Section 34 of the IPC against the appellants.
4.During the course of investigation, site was inspected, the seizure list was prepared, the prosecutrix and the appellants were got medically examined and the medical examination reports of the prosecutrix (Ex.P-2) as well as Ex. P-3 and Ex. P-4 of the appellant nos. 1 and 2 respectively were obtained.
5.After completion of the investigation, the police filed charge sheet against the appellants under Sections 366, 368 and 376 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The prosecution altogether examined 17 witnesses (PW-1 to PW- 17) and 09 documents were got marked (Ex. P-1 to P-09). The statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C. of the appellants were recorded in which they pleaded their false implication.
6.The learned Additional Sessions Judge upon consideration of the evidence and material available on record held that prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and accordingly acquitted all the accused of the charges framed against them.
7.Aggrieved by the order of acquittal, the State of West Bengal preferred an appeal before the High Court. The High Court upon reappreciation of the evidence and the totality of circumstances held that the trial court has extended benefit of doubt to the appellants under misconception of facts and wrong appreciation of evidence and accordingly came to the conclusion that the appellants are guilty of the offence punishable under Section 376/34 of the IPC. However, the High Court confirmed the acquittal of the other accused. The order of acquittal of those accused has attained its finality since there is no appeal preferred by the State. Hence, the appellants are before us in this appeal challenging their conviction and award
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
