SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1999 (3) Crimes 135
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT (DB)
Shyamal Kumar Sen and Amitava Lala, JJ.
M.C. Prasannah - Appellant
versus
The State - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.2 of 1998
Decided on 21-12-1998
Counsel for the parties:
For the Appellant: Mr. Ashis Kumar Roy, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. R.S. Saroop, Advocate.

Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 376 - Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 1989 - Section 3(1)(xii) - Appellant teacher of prosecutrix studying in class IV committed sexual intercourse with victim on several dates with assurances of marrying her - Prosecutrix because pregnant and finally gave birth to child - Trial Court convicted appellant holding age of victim girl between 12 & 15 years - Appeal Doctor's evidence about age of prosecutrix between 13 to 15 years was contrary of expert's opinion reflected in Modi's Medical Jurisprudence - School certificate did not show that at the time of admission of girl any birth certificate was produced - Delay of 3 months in lodging F.I.R. created grave suspicion Doctor's opinion regarding non-appearance of third mollar teeth in the denture of girl could indicate that girl was just below 17 years but above 16 years - Benefit of doubt deserved to be given to appellant - There was no question of dominating the will of victim girl and no case was made out that subsequently appellant had declined to marry her - Conviction could not be sustained. (Paras 10 to 15 & 22)

       Result: Appeal allowed.

       

JUDGMENT

S.K. Sen, J. -This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the Sessions Judge. Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Port Blair on 4th June, 1998 in Sessions Case No. 11 of 1993. The charge against the appellant was that the appellant being a class teacher in the Bengali Bustee in Teressa raped a minor Nicobaree tribal girl, a resident of Teressa Island in the Nicobar District.

2. The case of prosecution as appears from the said judgment of the Sessions Judge is that the accused Prasannah was a teacher in the Bengali Bustee in Teressa. The prosecutrix was a student of that school in Class IV. Accused Prasannah was the class teacher of the Prosecutrix/victim. While the victim used to go to the school, the accused would look her regularly. The victim also used to look the accused regularly. One day the accused told the victim to come to his house at night, which was at a distance of about 300 metres from the house of the victim. When the victim went to the house of the accused she was told by the accused that he loves the victim and he will marry her. With that assurance, he unclothed the victim and he unclothed himself also and thereafter committed sexual intercourse with that girl. Thereafter on several dates the victim was called by the accused in his house at night and he used to commit sexual intercourse with the victim with the assurance of marrying her. The victim indulged in committing sexual intercourse with the accused as the accused assured to marry her. The victim become pregnant for such act by the accused person. She stated to the accused about her pregnancy, but the accused gave her pieces of garments and told her to give those pieces of garments to an old lady and cause abortion and he refused to marry the victim. The victim however did not give the pieces of garments to the elderly woman and did not try to cause abortion as she wanted the child but she disclosed the fact to her mother and family members. Hearing that fact the mother of the victim and other members of the family became sorry and their family peace was disturbed. On 28-2-1991 at about 11.30 a.m. when the village first Captain Fistus (P.W.3) alongwith the second Captain Peter (P.W. 2) went to the house of James, the foster father of the victim where the victim used to reside with her mother, in course of their routine look and contact with the inhabitants of the village they found the victim (P.W.1) her mother and James in sorrow mood and were sitting under the platform of the house. On query they disclosed that the victim was carrying for about five months. The victim told them that her teacher Prasannah committed rape on her and as a result of which she was carrying. Thereafter the first captain and the second captain went to the police out post and the first captain lodged a complaint. The matter was informed to the SHO, Nancowry through wireless, who consulted with the Deputy Superintendent of Police. Car Nicobar as the age of the victim was not mentioned in the signal. Thereafter Nancowry P.S. Case No.9 of

1991 dated 2-3-1991 was started against this accused person Prasannah.

3. According to the instruction of Deputy Superintendent of Police, the SHO Nancowry P.S. Took up the investigation of the/case. On 4-3-1991 SHO. Nancowry P.S. reached Bengali Bustee in Teressa alongwith one Head Constable Ramakantan and started investigation. The victim handed over the cloth pieces to the I.O. which were seized by him under a seizure memo. He went to the house of the accused person, drew the sketch map with index. Thereafter he recorded the statement of the other witnesses on different dates. He arrested the accused person on 11-3-1991. On 12-3-1991 the victim and the accused were sent to Nancowry hospital for their medical examination. Both the victim and the accused were medically examined. The statements of the victim girl and other witnesses under section 164 of Code of Criminal Procedure were recorded by the learned Magistrate at P

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top