Back
2018 Supreme(Pat) 848
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Prakash Chandra Jaiswal, J.
BHONTU DAS @ BICHHU DAS - Appellant
Vs.
STATE OF BIHAR - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 119 of 2013
Decided On : 10-10-2018
Md Najmul Hoda, Binod Bihari Singh, Advs.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the court's reliance on the victim's testimony, corroborated by her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and medical evidence, to establish the occurrence of kidnapping and rape.
Headnote:
Kidnapping - Minor - Indian Penal Code, Section 363, Section 376 - The court found the appellant guilty of kidnapping a minor and committing rape against her. The court analyzed the evidence, including witness testimonies and medical reports, to establish the occurrence of the crimes. The appellant's sentence under Section 376 IPC was reduced to seven years considering the circumstances of the case.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the kidnapping of a minor girl and the appellant's conviction for kidnapping and rape. The appellant appealed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the appellant guilty of kidnapping a minor and committing rape against her. The court analyzed the evidence, including witness testimonies and medical reports, to establish the occurrence of the crimes.
Issues: The key issue was whether the prosecution had been able to prove the charges against the appellant beyond all reasonable doubts.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the victim's testimony, corroborated by her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and medical evidence, to establish the occurrence of kidnapping and rape. The court also considered the victim's age at the time of the occurrence and the appellant's actions in determining the appropriate charges and sentence.
Final Decision: The appellant's appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was convicted under Section 363 IPC instead of 366-A IPC, and Section 376 IPC. The appellant's sentence under Section 376 IPC was reduced to seven years.
Prakash Chandra Jaiswal, J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned APP for the State on this Criminal Appeal.
2. This criminal appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order of conviction dated 19.12.2012 and order of sentence dated 21.12.2012 passed by the Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Banka in Sessions Trial No. 121 of 2011, arising out of Shambhuganj P.S. Case No.146 of 2010, whereby the learned trial Court convicted the accused Bhontu Das alias Bichhu Das under Sections 366-A and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and also slapped him with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in case of default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for six months under Section 366-A IPC and also sentenced him to undergo R.I. for 10 years and slapped him with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in case of default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for one year under Section 376 IPC.
3. The factual matrix of the case is that Shambhuganj P.S. Case No.146 of 2010 was instituted under Section 366- A/34 of the IPC against Nand Kishore Das and Bhontu Das on the basis of written report of one Gena Das with the allegation in succinct that he resides in Delhi in connection with his work. On 29.10.2010 at 8 PM his wife informed him on his mobile that his daughter, Kajal Kumari aged about 13 years was missing since 6 PM on the said date. On the said information, he arrived at his house on 01.11.2010 and made search of his daughter. In course of search, Shashi Kumar Singh, Navin Prasad Singh and Others divulged him that they had seen Nand Kishore Das and Bhontu Das taking his daughter, Kajal Kumari on 29.10.2010 at 6 PM. He also learnt that his daughter has been kidnapped by the aforesaid persons with intent to perform marriage showing the accused.
4. The aforesaid case was investigated by the police and on conclusion of the investigation, I.O. submitted chargesheet against the accused Bhontu Das under Sections 366-A and 376 of the Indian Penal Code showing the accused Nand Kishore Das as not sent up.
5. On receiving the chargesheet and the case diary and perusing the same, the learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence against the accused and committed the case to the Court of Sessions and on transfer finally the case came in seisin of the Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge IV, Banka for trial.
6. Charge against the accused Bhontu Das was framed under Sections 366-A and 376 of the Indian Penal Code. Charge was read over and explained to the accused by the Court to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
7. To substantiate its case, in ocular evidence, the prosecution has examined altogether seven prosecution witnesses, namely, Navin Prasad Singh as P.W.-1, Shashi Kumar Singh as P.W.-2, Jitendra Kumar Das as P.W.-3, Manorma Devi @ Dhaniya Devi as P.W.-4, victim Kajal Kumari as P.W.-5, informant Gena Das as P.W.-6 and Dr. Indu Bala Prasad, who has examined the victim, as P.W.-7. Out of the aforesaid witnesses P.Ws.1 & 2 turned hostile. In documentary evidence the prosecution has filed and proved some documents including the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.
8. The statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal procedure. The case of the defence is complete denial of the occurrence claiming himself to be innocent. The accused has neither adduced any ocular nor documentary evidence in buttress of his case.
9. After hearing the parties and perusing the record, the learned trial Court passed the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence as detailed in the earlier paragraph.
10. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment and order of conviction and sentence, the convict has preferred the present Criminal Appeal.
11. The point for consideration in this case is, as to whether the prosecution has been able to bring home the charge levelled against the appellant beyond all
