JUDGMENT :

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Addl. P.P. for the State.

2. The appellant has preferred this appeal being aggrieved by judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.12.2005 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-IX, Giridih in Sessions Trial No.34 of 1997 whereby and whereunder, the appellant has been held guilty and sentenced for the offences as mentioned below in tabular form:-

3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 02.11.1996 at 06:00 P.M. when the informant-victim had gone to attend the call of nature, the appellant-accused on seeing her lifted her and thrashed her on the ground and attempted to commit rape upon her. On noise being raised by the informant, the younger mother-in-law of the informant-victim came running to the place of occurrence and seeing her, the appellant-accused left the informant and ran away after snatching away the ear ring and silver necklace from the neck of the informant. By the same, the informant sustained injury on her ear and by being thrashed on the ground she sustained pain on her waist and because of severe pain, she was not able to walk. On the basis of the written report submitted by the informant, police registered Jamua P.S. Case No. 195 of 1996 and took up investigation of the case. After completion of the investigation, police submitted police report and upon commitment of the case to the court of session, charges for the offence punishable under Section 323, 341, 376/511 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code were framed against the appellant-accused person. Upon the appellant-accused person pleading not guilty to the charges, he was put to trial.

4. In support of its case, the prosecution has altogether examined 4 witnesses.

5. P.W.4 is the informant-victim. She has stated that the occurrence took place about 8 years before her examination in court. At 06:00 P.M. when she was going to the village to attend the call of nature, the appellant-accused caught hold of her and thrashed her and wanted to do wrong things forcibly. Her bangles were broken. Her younger mother-in-law came there and the appellant-accused fled away. While fleeing away, the appellant-accused snatched gold ear ring and silver necklace of the informant causing scratches on her neck and bleeding injury on her ear. She was treated at Jamua. She identified the appellant-accused in court. In her cross-examination, she has stated that she cannot say the date of occurrence but it was in the month of Kartik. In her cross-examination, she has further stated that the appellant-accused person is the co-villager. The jewelry was given to the P.W.4 by her mother. She cannot say the weight or value of the jewelry. Blood oozed out from her ear and fell on her saree and ground.

6. P.W.1 – Narayan Yadav has stated that the occurrence took place more than 5 years before his examination in court. He saw the appellant-accused sitting from before at the place of occurrence. Five minutes after coming home from the place of occurrence, the P.W.1 heard noise and went running. P.W.1 saw that the informant-P.W.4 was lying at the place of occurrence. The appellant-accused attempted to commit rape upon her. The victim was taken in a trekker to Jamua Hospital for treatment. On being asked, the victim stated that she has been raped by the appellant-accused. He has seen the appellant-accused running away with the gold ear ring and silver chain. He identified the appellant-accused in court. In his cross-examination, he has stated the boundaries of the place of occurrence. He was also present at the place