The evidence of a victim of sexual assault stands almost at par with the evidence of an injured witness and is entitled to great weight. The delay in the test identification parade was not fatal to the prosecution case, given the traumatic and tragic experience of the victim and her abundant opportunity to notice the features of the appellants.

JUDGMENT

S.K. Sahoo, J. - CRLA No.227 of 2008 has been filed by the appellants Kulamani Mohakud and Bala @ Chittaranjan Hesa which was presented before this Court on 13.05.2008 and admitted on 08.09.2008.

JCRLA No.78 of 2010 was registered on the basis of the prisoners petition received from the appellant Bala @ Chittaranjan Hesa, which was admitted on 04.11.2013 after condoning a delay of 502 days.

Since by the time of registration of JCRLA No.78 of 2010, the appeal preferred by the appellant Bala @ Chittaranjan Hesa has already been admitted in CRLA No. 227 of 2008, this JCRLA No.78 of 2010 is not maintainable and accordingly, the same is disposed of.

Both the appellants faced trial in the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge -cum- Addl. Special Judge, Baripada in G.R. Case No.431 of 2005/T.C. No.10 of 2007 for offences punishable under section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code and section 3(2)(v) of the S.C. & S.T. (PoA) Act, 1989 (hereafter 1989 Act). Learned trial Court vide impugned judgment and order dated 17.03.2008 though acquitted both the appellants of the charge under section 3(2)(v) of the 1989 Act, but found them guilty under section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand) each, in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months.

2. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 14.10.2005 the victim (P.W.20) along with some of her friends had been to village Ghagarbeda to watch Dussehra festival and after visiting the festival, in the evening hours when they were returning to their village by foot, on the way a Commander jeep came and the driver of the jeep asked the victim girl and her companions to board the jeep with the minimal charge of rupees five per person and accordingly, all of them boarded the jeep. At that point of time, there were three persons in the jeep including the driver and subsequently another accused boarded the jeep. It is the further case of the prosecution that after covering some distance, four persons who were present in the jeep asked the companions of the victim to get down from the jeep and pushed them from the jeep, but they did not allow the victim to get down from the jeep and took her inside a forest in that jeep. It is the further prosecution case that inside the forest, all the four accused persons committed gang rape on the victim one after another. The companions of the victim, who were asked to get down from the jeep, intimated about the same to P.W.1 Narendra Mohakud, who in turn intimated P.W.3 Mahendra Mahanta to report the matter to the police. P.W.3 came to Ghagarbeda police Outpost and intimated about the occurrence to P.W.25 Lokanath Bhoi, the Sub-Inspector of Police attached to the said outpost. On getting such information, P.W.25 along with P.W.3 Mahendra Mahanta, P.W.5 Bichitrananda Giri and others went in search of the victim girl as well as the Commander jeep. It is the prosecution case that P.W.25 noticed the Commander jeep coming from the side of Fulcom Chhak and he stopped the vehicle, which was having registration No. OR-09-D-3444. In the said jeep, the appellant no.1 Kulamani Mohakud and accused Debendra Naik and Madhu Karua were present. P.W.25 took all those three persons and the Commander jeep to Ghagarbeda police outpost. While interrogation was going on, accused Debendra Naik stealthily escaped from the police outpost, but the appellant no.1 Kulamani Mohakud was detained in the police outpost. P.W.25 along with accused Madhu Karua went in search of the victim girl towards Fulcom Chhak, but he could not locate the girl and returned to the outpost at about 12.30 midnight, where he found that the appellant no.1 had escaped from the outpost. Appellant no.2 Bala @ Chittaranjan Hesa came to the police outpost to ascertain about the Commander jeep but he was detained there in the night. On the same night at