In criminal cases of sexual assault, the reliability of witness testimonies and timely reporting are crucial; unexplained delays and contradictions can lead to acquittal.

JUDGMENT :

Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.

1. Both the instant criminal appeals are preferred for setting aside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 30.04.2003 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-II, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa in S.T. No. 75 of 2002 whereby and whereunder the appellants have been held guilty and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years along with a fine of Rs. 1000/- each with default stipulation for the offence under Section 376 (2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code.

2. We have already heard the arguments of Mr. B.M. Tripathy, learned Sr. counsel and Mr. R.P. Gupta, learned counsel for the appellants and learned APP for the State.

Factual Matrix:-

3. The factual matrix giving rise to these appeals is that the informant-cum-victim aged about 14 years was a student of class-VI. On 03.12.2001, at about 4:00 PM, the victim girl proceeded to her village Jharbera from Gopipur to bring grocery articles etc. on her cycle. It is alleged that when she reached near Trila Chowk, she met with one Javni Toppo (P.W.-2), aged about 18 years and gave lift to her on her cycle. It is further alleged that near Raikera, both the girl alighted from the cycle and started moving on foot due to hillock road. In the meantime, Mangilal Mahto, Postman-Raikera along with Udhisther Mahto @ Compounder Mahto, Anand Mahto and Nishikant Mahto, all residents of Raikera started chasing both the girls, who were running to some distance but got tired and fell down along with her cycle. It is alleged that informant’s girlfriend anyhow escaped from accused persons and fled away but the informant-cum-victim girl was caught and lifted by Mangilal, Udhisther, Anand and Nishikant, who gaged her mouth and brought towards Lokra Huri Hillock in a bushy area, laid her down on earth, untying her under garments, all the four persons committed rape on her, one by one, as a result of which, she became unconscious.

It is further alleged that when the victim girl regained consciousness, she saw that accused persons had fled away. Upon raising alarm by her, one Raju Samad (P.W.-4) of Village Raikera arrived and helped her serving water from a pond and brought the victim at her maternal grandmother’s home at village Jharbera, nearly about 12 o’clock at night. The informant narrated the above incident to her maternal grandmother (P.W.-5) and in the next morning, she went to her home and disclosed about occurrence to her parents. It is further alleged that on that day, marriage engagement of Javni Toppo (P.W.-2) was fixed, hence matter could not be reported to police and the F.I.R. was lodged on 06.12.2001.

On the basis of above information, F.I.R. was registered as Manoharpur P.S. Case No. 56/2001 dated 06.12.2001 for the offences under sections 376(g) of IPC

After conclusion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted for the offence under Section 376 (g) of the IPC.

The case was committed to the Court of Sessions where S.T. No. 75 of 2002 was registered. The appellants denied from the charges and claimed to be tried.

4. In the course of trial, altogether 11 witnesses were examined by the prosecution.

5. Apart from oral testimony of the witnesses, followi