Back
2018 Supreme(Jhk) 348
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
KAILASH PRASAD DEO, J.
Ashish Kumar Singh @ Rinku Singh S/o Sri Govind Singh – Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Respondent
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 232 of 2004
Decided On : 22-06-2018
For the Appellants : Mr. Arjun Narayan Deo, Mr. P.P. Chatterjee.
For the Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Kumar Mishra.
Proper recording of statements under Section 164 and the credibility of evidence are crucial in criminal cases.
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code - Conviction under Sections 366 and 376 - 366, 376
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for the offence under Sections 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code for enticing a girl for unnatural act. The victim's statement under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code was a key piece of evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the victim's statement under Section 164 was not recorded in accordance with the procedures, and the investigating officer's testimony contradicted the prosecution's case. The court concluded that it was a case of elopement and acquitted the appellant, giving him the benefit of doubt.
Issues: Validity of victim's statement under Section 164, credibility of evidence, and the nature of the alleged offence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of following proper procedures for recording statements under Section 164 and carefully evaluating the credibility of evidence in criminal cases.
Final Decision: The appellant was acquitted, and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence were set aside.
KAILASH PRASAD DEO, J.
1. Heard Mr. Arjun Narayan Deo assisted by Mr. P.P. Chatterjee, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Rajesh Kumar Mishra, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.
2. The instant Criminal appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 23.12.2003 and order of sentence dated 24.12.2003, in Sessions Trial No. 20 of 2003, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 7, Hazaribag, whereby the sole appellant, Ashish Kumar Singh @ Rinku Singh has been convicted for the offence under Sections 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and awarded rigorous imprisonment for seven years and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each, under both the heads separately and in case of default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months. Both the sentences are directed to run concurrently. By the said impugned judgment of conviction, the learned trial court has acquitted the co-accused, Sanjay Sah @ Sanjay Kumar Sahu.
3. The prosecution case is based upon, written report submitted by Dipak Kumar Chanda, before the officer In-charge, Ramgarh Police Station, on 8.5.2002, stating therein, that in the morning at about 7 a.m. his daughter Piyali Chanda @ Munni, aged about 17½ years, went to attend classes at Chhotanagpur College, Ramgarh, along with her friend Mamoni, but when she did not return by 12 o’clock, as such, informant started searching his daughter and during search, it was found that Ashish Kumar Singh @ Rinku S/o Govind Singh has enticed her girl, for unnatural act and thereafter a First Information Report was lodged.
4. On the basis of the aforesaid fardbeyan of the informant, the Police instituted First Information Report being Ramgarh P.S. Case No. 178 of 2002 dated 08.05.2002 corresponding to G.R. No. 1120 of 2002, under Sections 366 and 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code.
5. After investigation, the Police submitted two charge-sheets vide First Charge-sheet No. 285 of 2002 dated 11.08.2002 under Sections 366, 376, 120(B), 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused/appellant, Ashish Kumar Singh @ Rinku Singh and subsequently second charge-sheet vide Charge-sheet No. 72 of 2003 dated 28.04.2003 under Sections 366, 376, 120(B), 34 of the Indian Penal Code against Sanjay Kumar Sah.
6. The cognizance of the offence has been taken vide orders dated 12.08.2002 and 18.06.2003 against Ashish Kumar Singh and Sanjay Kumar Sahu respectively and the case has been committed to the Court of Sessions vide Notification dated 20.06.2003. The learned trial court has framed charge against the appellant, Ashish Kumar Singh @ Rinku Singh under Sections 366, 376 of the Indian Penal Code on 10th February, 2003, to which the appellant pleaded his innocence and claimed to be tried.
7. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, has examined altogether nine witnesses and also brought documentary evidence, which has been marked as Exhibits.
8. Pappu Singh has been examined as PW-1 and he is the Hotel Manager, Shiv Prasad Mitra has been examined as PW-2 and he is the brother-in-law of the informant, Anjusri Chanda has been examined as PW-3 and she is the mother of the victim, Dr. Sandhya Topno has been examined as PW-4 and she is the medical officer, who has examined the victim, Deepak Kumar Chanda (informant of the case) has been examined as PW-5, Piyali Chanda (victim of the case) has been examined as PW-6, Tewaran Oraon, first Investigating officer has been examined as PW-7, Ramchandra Paswan (subsequent Investigating officer) has been examined as PW-8, Vijay Kumar, learned Judicial Magistrate, who recorded the statement of the victim under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code, has been examined as PW-9.
9. Medical report of the victim has been proved and marked as Exhibit-1, Fardbeyan of Deepak Kumar Chanda has been proved and marked as Exhibit-2 and his signature on the fardbeyan has been proved and marked as Exhibit-2/1, signature of Piyali Cha
