Vishnudeo Narayan, J.-This appeal 3.t the instance of the appellant is directed against the impugned judgment and order dated 13.7.1998 passed in Sessions Trial No. 11 of 1998 by Shri P.N. Yadav, Sessions Judge, Dhanbad whereby and whereunder the appellant was found guilty or the offence punishable under Section 366/34 of the Indian Penal Code and he was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years.

2. The prosecution case has arisen on the basis of the written report (Ext. 2) of P.W.7 Chandi Charan Mishra, the brother of the Tarpana Mishra, the alleged victim in his case lodged before the O/C. Hairharpur (Gomoh) P.S. on 26.8.1997 at 22.00 hours Nhich was forwarded to the O/C. Topchanchi Police Station and a formal first information report was drawn on the basis of the said written report on 26.8.1997 at 23.00 hours regarding the occurrence which is said to lave taken place in the night between 24th and 25th of August, 1997 at about 12.00/ 12.30 hours at village-Khairio, P.S. Topchanchi (Hairharpur), District-Dhanbad and the written report and formal first information report were received on 28.8.1997 n the Court empowered to take cognizance.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is hat P.W. 5 Tarpana Mishra went for the nature's call at about 12.00/12.30 hours in he night between 24th and 25th of August, 1997 outside her house informing him and his wife and he came out in the verandah of the house where he sat and five minutes thereafter he heard the cry of his sister. Tarpana Mishra and he ran to the place from where her cry was coming. It is alleged that when he reached there he saw three or four persons under mask taking her forcibly catching her and he protested to them and one of them abused him and asked him to stop failing which he shall be gunned. The prosecution case further is that he caught one of them and he has scuffle with him and the mask of the said man was removed and the said man was identified as Alam Ansari, the appellant, and he asked him as to what he is doing with his sister and the informant called his brother and the moment his brother came out of his house, the appellant pushed him and fled away and in the meantime rest of the. persons aforesaid fled away forcibly taking Tarpana Mishra with them. It is also alleged that the said mask was made of shirt of the appellant.

4. In course of investigation P.W. 5 Tarpana Mishra aforesaid was recovered by the I.O. five hundred yards east of village Ghorathi on 27.8.1997 while she was going by the road to the said village and thereafter her statement under Section 164 Cr. P.C. was recorded on 30.8.1997 in which she has disclosed that she is 30 years old and she was apprehended by the police at 16.00 hours on 25.8.1997 on the road and in the evening on that very day she was brought to the house of her brother, the informant.

5. The appellant has pleaded not guilty to the charge levelled against him and he claims himself to be innocent and to have committed no offence and he has been falsely implicated in this case due to enmity by the informant to save himself from the case regarding an earlier occurrence in which the informant has assaulted him.

6. The prosecution has, in all, examined nine witnesses to substantiate its case. P.W. 7 Chandi Charan Mishra is the informant of this case and brother of P.W. 5 Tarpana Mishra, the alleged victim in this case and P.W. 6 Pratima Devi is his wife. P.w. 5 Tarpana Mishra, P.W. 1 Sanjay Kumar Pandey, P.W. 2 Jagarnath Kumhar, P.W. 3 Vinod Kumhar, P.W. 4 Shakti Pad Mishra and P.w. 8 Nepal Kumhar have turned hostile and they do not at all support the prosecution case P.w. 9 S.1. Sanch Man Tamang is the I.O. of this case. P.W. 5, the victim, in course of investigation was examined by Dr. (Mrs.) A. Verma on the requisition dated 30.8.1997 of the I.O. but the said doctor has not been examined in this case for the prosecution but the medical reports per her pen are Exts. 5 and 5/1 in this case. Ext. 4