The court ruled that mere allegations and inconsistent witness testimonies fail to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, leading to acquittal.

JUDGMENT :

Sunil Kumar Panwar, J.

Heard Mr. Vipul Sinha(Amicus Curiae), learned counsel for the appellants and Mrs. Anita Kumari Singh, learned A.P.P for the State.

2. This appeal has been preferred by the appellants being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.12.2006 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, I, Saran at Chapra in Sessions Trial No. 890 of 05, arising out of Avatar Nagar P.S. Case No. 09/05, whereby and whereunder the appellants have been convicted under Sections 506 /34 and 342 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo two years of rigorous imprisonment and six months of rigorous imprisonment respectively. Further, the appellant Arjun Rai was also convicted under Section 354 of the IPC and was sentenced to undergo 2 years of rigorous imprisonment.

3. The prosecution case as per the written statement of Ramanand Manjhi(informant/P.W-5) dated 05.02.2005 is to the effect that on 04.02.2005, the informant’s daughter went to arhar field for easing out, in the meantime, appellant Arjun Rai attempted to rape with her by catching hold of her hand but on alarm being raised by the victim, Suresh Manjhi(P.W.-2) and Anil Manjhi , the son and nephew of the informant tried to catch hold of Arjun Rai but he escaped from the place of occurrence but subsequently appellants Sunil Rai, Birendra Rai, Mukesh Rai, Bhushan Rai and Heero Rai came armed with lathi, Bhala, farsa and sword and ordered to kill and put the house of the informant on fire but somehow, the informant and his family members fled from there and the informant went to police who said that they will talk to accused. The application was filed before S.P. and consequently the Awatar Nagar P.S. Case No. 09/05 under Sections 34 2, 34, 506 and 376 and 511 of the IPC was registered.

4. On the basis of written application of the informant(P.W.-5) Awatar Nagar P.S. Case No. 09/05 was registered against the accused persons/appellants for the offence punishable under Sections 376 , 511, 342, 506 and 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and after completing the investigation, charge- sheet was submitted against the appellants under Sections 376 , 511, 342, 506 and 34 of the I.P.C. Thereafter, cognizance was also taken against the appellants and case was committed to the court of Sessions for trial and disposal.

5. Charge was framed against the accused/appellants under Sections 34 2, 506 and 34 of the IPC. The accused/appellant Arjun Rai was also charged under Sections 376 and 511 of the IPC. Trial Court explained the charge to the appellants to which they pleaded not guilty and claim to be tried.

6. The point of consideration in this appeal is whether the prosecution is able to prove the charge levelled against the accused/appellants beyond reasonable doubt or not.

7. During the course of trial, altogether six witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution to substantiate the charge levelled against the accused/ appellant. P.W.-1 Jagarnath Manjhi who is neighbour, P.W.-2 Sudarshan Manjhi@ Suresh Manjhi who is brother of the victim girl, P.W.-3 Bhuwari Devi who is mother of the victim, P.W.-4 Seema Kumari who is victim of this case, P.W.-5 Ramanand Manjhi who is father of the victim and informant of this case and P.W.-6 Rafique Ahmad Khan who is I.O of this case.

8. P.W.-1, namely, Jagarnath Manjhi who is neighbour, deposed in para-5 of his evidence that he has never been examined under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C and further deposed that he heard about the occurrence but had not seen the occurrence.

9. P.W.-2, namely, Sudarshan Manjhi @