The conviction for rape was upheld based on the victim's reliable testimony, corroborated by medical evidence, illustrating criteria for a 'sterling witness'.

JUDGMENT :

RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The present appeal has been preferred for setting aside the judgment of conviction dated 07.05.2013 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘impugned judgment’) and the order of sentence dated 13.05.2013 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘impugned order’) passed by learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Supaul (hereinafter called the ‘learned Trial Court’) in S.T. No. 278 of 2012/T.R. No. 55 of 2012 arising out of Pipra P.S. Case No. 163 of 2012, G.R. No. 1714 of 2012 whereby and whereunder the learned Trial Court has been pleased to find the appellant guilty of the offence under Section 376 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (in short ‘I.P.C.’) and directed the appellant to undergo a sentence of imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 376 I.P.C. In the event of default in payment of fine, the accused-convict would further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months.

Prosecution Case

3. The prosecution story is based on the fardbeyan of the victim aged about nine years recorded by S.I. Subhash Ram on 02.10.2012 at 11:30 hours in Primary Heath Centre, Pipra. In her fardbeyan, the victim alleged that on the said date (02.10.2012) in the morning at 8 O' Clock she had gone to play in the courtyard of Hare Ram Mandal (the appellant) where the daughter of Hare Ram Mandal was there. She alleged that Hare Ram Mandal sent his daughter outside for some work, his wife was cleaning rice on the hand pump in the courtyard. She has further alleged that at the same time, Hare Ram Mandal caught hold of her hand and before the victim could have understood anything, he put one of his hands on to her mouth and made her to lie flat on the verandah whereafter he opened her undergarment and committed wrong act with her. The victim alleged that when she got pain and shouted then he left her and fled away. After wearing back her undergarment, she came back to her maternal grandmother, her frock and undergarment were having blood marks. She disclosed the entire occurrence to her maternal grandmother and her mother thereafter her maternal grandmother told it to the neighbours and brought the victim to Pipra hospital for treatment. The fardbeyan of the victim has been witnessed by her maternal grandmother, (P.W.-2). On the basis of the said fardbeyan, formal First Information Report (Exhibit ‘5’) has been registered on 02.10.2012 at 12:15 P.M.

4. After investigation of the case, the police submitted a charge-sheet against the appellant for the offences under Section 376 I.P.C. Cognizance was taken by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Supaul on 17.11.2012 and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions on 04.12.2012. The charges were read over to the appellant which he denied and claimed to be tried.

5. To substantiate the charge, prosecution has examined as many as thirteen witnesses and adduced several documentary evidences which have been marked exhibits. The list of witnesses and the list of exhibits are as under:-

List of Prosecution Witnesses

List of Exhibits brought on be