Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.—Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The present appeal has been preferred for setting aside the judgment of conviction dated 07.02.2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘impugned judgment’) and the order of sentence dated 17.02.2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘impugned order’) passed by learned Exclusive Special Judge (POCSO Act), Darbhanga (hereinafter called the ‘learned trial court’) in POCSO G.R. Case No. 16 of 2019 arising out of Darbhanga (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 23 of 2019.

3. By the impugned judgment, the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 376(3), 506 of the Indian Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (in short ‘POCSO Act’). By the impugned order, he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for thirty years with a fine of Rs.30,000/- under Section 376(3) IPC and in default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo simple imprisonment for six months. He has also been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for thirty years with a fine of Rs.30,000/- under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and in default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo simple imprisonment for six months. He has further been sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.5,000/- under Section 506 IPC and in default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo simple imprisonment for one month. All the sentences are to run concurrently.

Prosecution Case

4. The prosecution case is based on the written application of the informant who is the mother of the victim (PW- 1) submitted to the S.H.O., Mahila Police Station, Laheriasarai, Darbhanga. In her written application, she has stated that in the evening at about 7:00 pm on 24.03.2019, Lal Babu Parmahans who is residing in front of her house has committed rape upon her daughter (PW-2) in mango orchard and on hearing her cry, some villagers went there then found her anxious and the villagers saw Lal Babu Paramhans running from there. The informant asked her daughter then she disclosed weeping that earlier also the appellant had committed rape with her and threatened to kill her parents by showing pistol on disclosure of this matter to them. The informant alleged that they are musclemen and after the occurrence, the entire family of the appellant threatened the informant on visiting her house and offered money to settle the dispute.

5. On the basis of this written application, Mahila P.S. Case No. 23 of 2019 dated 26.03.2019 was registered under Sections 376, 506 IPC and Section 4, 6 of the POCSO Act against the appellant. After investigation, Police submitted charge-sheet bearing No. 95 of 2019 dated 25.09.2019 against this appellant under Sections 376, 506 IPC and Section 4, 6 of the POCSO Act. On the basis of the charge-sheet, learned trial court vide order dated 17.02.2020 took cognizance of the offences punishable under above-mentioned sections. Charges were read over and explained to the appellant in Hindi to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Accordingly, vide order dated 09.01.2021, charges were framed under Sections 376(3), 506 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

6. In course of trial, the prosecution examined as many as nine witnesses and exhibited several documents to prove it’s case. The list of the prosecution witnesses and the list of exhibits are being shown hereunder in tabular form:—

List of Prosecution Witnesses