PATNA HIGH COURT
D.P.S.Choudhary, J.
Sadhu Alias Langra Alias Shivji Mahto
Versus
State Of Bihar
Criminal Appeal No. 231 of 1996 ;
Decided On : FEBRUARY 15, 2000
Sec. 376 - Rape - Indian Penal Code - [Sec. 376 of the Indian Penal Code]
Fact of the Case:
The victim alleged that she was raped by the accused, but later stated that nothing bad was done to her due to a compromise outside the court. The trial court found her later statement to be tutored.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution was able to substantiate the charge of rape against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt.
Issues: The issues revolved around the victim's testimony, the compromise outside the court, and the credibility of the evidence presented.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the victim's initial testimony and the medical examination to conclude that the accused committed the rape, disregarding the later compromised statement.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the period of sentence for the accused was reduced to the time already served in custody.
1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 21st of August, 1996 passed by the Sessions Judge, Katihar in Sessions Case No. 233 of 1995 convicting the sole appellant under Sec. 376 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the I. P. C.) and sentenced him to undergo R. I. for seven years.
2. The prosecution case in brief is that in her fardbayan dated 13-8-1995 recorded at 7.30 p.m. at Samapur Police Outpost the victim girl Kanti Kumari (P. W. 1) alleged that her mother is dead. Her father remains mostly ill. On this day at about 2.00 p.m. her father has sent her along with her younger sister Soni to Samapur Chowk for selling onion and potato etc. In the evening she sent back the remaining onion and potato left out after sale with her younger sister and a Coolie to her house. In the way she met accused Langra who gave her a cake to eat and took her inside the Gumati. It was further alleged that he forcibly committed rape on her. She came to her house and narrated the occurrence to her father. She went before the police along with her father and other villagers where her fardbayan (Ext. 3) was recorded over which she gave her signature (Ext. 1/1). On the basis of the fardbeyan the F. I. R. was registered. The I.O. sent the victim girl for medical examination and after obtaining the report (Ext. 2) submitted the charge-sheet and after commitment the trial proceeded in the court below.
3. The case of the defence is that he has been falsely implicated in this case because of village politics.
4. On behalf of the prosecution in all seven witnesses have been examined, out of which P. W. 1 (Kanti Kumari) victim girl who is informant, P. W. 5 (Arjun Shah) is her father and P. W. 6 (Dr. Minni Rani) who examined the victim girl. P. W. 7 (Chandeshwari Prasad Yadav) is the I.O. P.W. 2 (Bindeshwari Thakur) has been declared hostile, who stated that he had no knowledge about the occurrence. Similarly P. W. 3 (Prakash Sah) has not supported the prosecution case. He stated that when he returned back from Purnia in the village, he learnt that accused has committed rape on a minor girl. P. W. 4 (Udai Prasad Gupta) stated that victim girl Kanti Kumari is his grand-daughter. He is a witness on thefardbayan and proved the signature (Ext. 1/1). In cross-examination he stated that he knew nothing about the occurrence.
5. P. W. 6, the lady doctor stated that on 14-8-1995 at 9.55 p.m. She examined Kanti Kumari on being referred by the police and on the basis of her clinical examination and also on the basis of the report of the Radiologist and Dental Surgeon she found her age in between 9 to 10 years. She stated that she did not find mark of any physical violence on her body and external gentallia. However, she stated that she found hymen torn and also found redness around the introitus. She stated that on pathological examination no spermatozoa was found in her vaginal swab. She further opined that presence of injuries found over vagina of Kanti Kumari may be due to attempt of sexual intercourse or by any other means. To a pointed question by the court she stated that the hymen of the girl cannot be torn without penetration of finger or penis. In substance the evidence of the lady Doctor lent support to the ocular testimony of the victim girl Kanti Kumari that she was raped.
6. The evidence of the victim girl (P. W. 1) is to the effect that on the date of alleged occurrence she was returning home in the evening at about 7.00 p.m. alone. Her sister earlier went home along with the Coolie carring potato and onion etc. She stated that in the way she met the accused whom she identified in the dock. He gave her a cake to eat and took her inside a Gumati. She stated that accused forcibly removed her clothes including the under garments and forcibly committed rape on her. He asked her not to narrate this occurrence to any one in the village. After returning to her house, she narrated the entire fact to her father
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.