The importance of corroborative evidence in cases of alleged rape and the rebuttable nature of the presumption regarding the victim's statement.

S.N.Pathak, J.

1. This appeal directed against the Judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed Shri Roshan Lal Sharma, 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Nalanda in Sessions Trial No. 110 of 1997. The appellant was convicted under Sec. 376 as also under Sec. 323 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and one month respectively. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. The case of the prosecution, as recorded in the complaint-petition of the victim. Quraisha Khatoon is that on 146-1996, at about 8 p.m., she had gone out of her house to ease herself in a field behind boring. Suddenly, the accused appellant Qurban and one unknown person pounced upon her and pressed her mouth. The unknown person was weilding a pistol in his hand who threatened to kill her. Thereafter, the accused-appellant as also the unknown person subjected her to criminal assault one by one. When the complainant used to resist, she used to be fisted by the culprits on her mouth. After the alleged occurrence, both the culprits fled away and when they had gone away to some distance, she raised alarm which attracted the witnesses who saw the culprits in flight. The complainant disclosed the entire occurrence to the witnesses who had gathered there. The complainant did not go to the Police Station in the night of the occurrence out of fear. In the next morning at 5 a.m., she went to Bihar P.S. but her case was not entertained there. Subsequently, she filed her complaint-petition in Court which was referred to the Police for investigation. The Police after investigating submitted charge-sheet and after cognizance and commitment, the appellant faced trial and was convicted and sentenced as stated above.

3. The accused denied the charge and alleged false implication and produced five DWs from whose evidence it has been elicited that there was a hand pump in front of the house of the complainant which had gone out of order. The mohalla people wanted subscription to repair the same in which there was a quarrel between the accused-appellant and the complainant in which she sustained injury on her eyes. Then, she threatened to implicate the accused in some case and the instant case was a sequel to the aforesaid incident.

4. The prosecution examined in all five witnesses. P.W. 5 is the I.O. of the case. He has proved formal FIR, etc. and so far as the alleged occurrence itself is concerned his evidence is based on the statements of other witnesses. He had visited the P.O. He found human excreta at the P.O. and no other significant material. P.W. 4 is the doctor who examined the victim on 15-6-1996 at 3.45 p.m., and I shall discuss his evidence later. P. W. 3 is Soghra Khatoon. She is mother of the victim lady. She had learnt about the alleged occurrence from her daughter, the complainant. She had gone to the P.O. on hearing cry of her daughter. P.W. 2 is Roshan Khatoon. She is daughter of the victim and she is also hearsay witness who came to know about the alleged occurrence from her mother. P.W. 1 is the victim herself. So far as her evidence on the alleged occurrence in particular is concerned, it is almost the same, as stated in the complaint petition except on certain points, which according to the appellants lawyer tarries more importance. The appellants lawyer pointed out that there is her statement in the complaint petition that when the accused persons had gone away to some distance the victim had raised also. In her evidence in court, she said that the accused-persons after committing the occurrence remained there and they terrified the witnesses. This is at paragraph 27 of her evidence where she said that Roshan Soghra Sharif and others came after the occurrence whom the accused-persons threatened. She however, did not disclose the names of others Sharif has not been examined. At paragraph 33, she said that she went to the P.S. Where she related the alleged occurrence, but she did not sh