IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
S.K. Sahoo, J.
Rabi Munda - Appellant
Versus
State Of Odisha - Respondent
JCRLA No. 12 of 2018
Decided On : 13-09-2021
Rape - POCSO Act - Indian Penal Code - 376(2)(i), 4 - Rule 12(3)(b) of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 - The court analyzed the evidence and found that the prosecution failed to prove the victim's age, and the medical evidence did not corroborate the victim's testimony of rape. The court also highlighted the legal error in imposing punishment for both offences under section 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 of the POCSO Act.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant faced trial for offences under section 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 of the POCSO Act for allegedly raping a minor girl. The victim's father lodged an FIR, and the appellant pleaded not guilty, claiming false implication.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the victim's age and that the medical evidence did not support the victim's testimony of rape. It also noted the legal error in imposing punishment for both offences.
Issues: The key issues were the victim's age, the credibility of the victim's testimony, and the imposition of punishment for both offences.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of proving the victim's age and the need for corroboration of the victim's testimony. It also highlighted the legal error in imposing punishment for both offences.
Final Decision: The appellant was acquitted of the charges under section 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 of the POCSO Act. The court also emphasized the legal error in imposing punishment for both offences.
JUDGMENT
S.K. Sahoo, J. - The appellant Rabi Munda faced trial in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge -cum- Special Judge, Keonjhar in Special Case No.185/61 of 2016-14 for commission of offences punishable under section 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereafter referred to as 'POCSO Act') on the accusation that he committed rape on the victim, a girl aged about twelve years on 02.08.2014 at about 12 noon in Chiragunidhoda forest at village Uchumadihi under Nayakote police station in the district of Keonjhar.
The learned trial Court vide impugned judgment and order dated 10.11.2017 found the appellant guilty of the offences charged and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand), in default, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence under section 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code and he was further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- (rupees three thousand), in default, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence under section 4 of the POCSO Act and both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
2. The prosecution case, as per the first information report lodged by the father of the victim, namely, Shyama Sundar Majhi (P.W.6), in short, is that on 02.08.2014 at about 12 noon, while the victim (P.W.4), who was a minor girl aged about twelve years had been to nearby Chiragunidhoda forest for grazing goats and she was grazing goats, at that time, the appellant suddenly came near the victim finding her alone, made her lie on the ground, torn her frock and undergarments and forcibly committed rape on her. The victim (P.W.4) raised hullah and on hearing her hullah, when one Sabita Barik (P.W.2) and others who were working in the nearby cultivable fields rushed to the spot, on seeing them, the appellant fled away. The victim was feeling pain on her private parts.
The victim (P.W.4) narrated about the occurrence before her brother Ganesh, who in turn intimated the same to his father (P.W.6) and his mother (P.W.7) over phone. After the parents of the victim returned, they came to know about the occurrence from the victim. Since it was late night, on the next day i.e. on 03.08.2014 P.W.6 came to Nayakote police station in the district of Keonjhar and lodged the written report which was scribed by one Mangulu Palei (P.W.1) of village Dudhapasi as per his instruction, who read over and explained the report to P.W.6 and after he found it to be correct, he signed on the report.
3. P.W.10 Rashmi Ranjan Dash, who was the Sub- Inspector of police of Nayakote police station and also in-charge of I.I.C. in his absence, on receipt of the written report from P.W.6, registered the same as F.I.R. (Ext.1) in Nayakote P.S. Case No.34 dated 03.08.2014 under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 of the POCSO Act against the appellant. He took up investigation of the case and during course of investigation, he examined the informant (P.W.6), the victim (P.W.4) and others. He proceeded to the spot and prepared the spot map (Ext.7). The victim was sent to District Headquarters Hospital, Keonjhar for medical examination along with her wearing apparels for examination. On 04.08.2014, he seized the wearing apparels of the victim and prepared the seizure list vide Ext.8. On the same day, he made prayer for recording of statement of the victim under section 164 Cr.P.C. and accordingly, the same was recorded by the Magistrate on 05.08.2014. The appellant was arrested on 04.08.2014 and on the next day i.e. on 05.08.2014, he was sent for medical examination to C.H.C., Banspal and then forwarded to the Court on the same day. On 08.08.2014, the I.O. (P.W.10) received the medical examination report of the appellant and on 13.08.2014 he received the medical examination report of the v
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.