The court found that the absence of resistance and evidence indicated the victim consented to the sexual act, leading to the dismissal of the rape charge against the appellant.

Judgment :

S.K. SAHOO, J.

1.The appellant Sanu Munda faced the trial in the Court of learned Assistant Sessions Judge (S.T.C.), Deogarh in S.T. Case No.63/05 of 2014 for commission of offence under section 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code on the accusation that on 16.03.2014 at about 8.00 p.m. in the jungle of village-Satakiari, being the brother-in-law (husband’s younger brother) of the victim, he committed rape on her. The learned trial Court vide impugned judgment dated 09.03.2021 held the appellant guilty of the offence under section 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code and vide order dated 16.03.2021 sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand), in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year more.

Factual Background:

2. The victim (P.W.4) lodged the first information report before the Inspector-in-charge, Reamal Police Station on 18.03.2014 stating therein that on 15.03.2014 during the evening hours, she had been to the village Satakiari to grind paddy, but the mill owner refused to grind the same as that was a Purnima Day. On such refusal, while the victim was returning back home at about 8 p.m. with her breast-feeding child, on the way, there was a jungle and while she was passing through that jungle, the appellant, who is her brother-in-law, committed rape on her. It is further stated in the F.I.R that as she was late in returning to the house, her husband Sama Munda (P.W.9) came in search of her and noticed the incident. A meeting was convened in the village over this issue on 17.03.2014, but the appellant did not confess his guilt in the meeting.

3. As per the advice of the villagers, the written report was scribed by P.W.1 Pratap Biswal and presented in the police station. On such report, Reamal P.S. Case No.52 dated 18.03.2014 was registered under section 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant. The I.I.C., Reamal Police Station after registration of the case, entrusted P.W.15 (Smt. Santoshi Mohanta), S.I. of Police of the said police station to take up the investigation.

4. During course of investigation, P.W.15 examined the victim, issued requisition for her medical examination to the Medical Officer, Community Health Centre, Chhatabar and sent the victim along with a woman constable. The I.O. examined other witnesses, visited the spot, prepared the spot map and also seized the wearing apparels of the victim as per seizure list vide Ext.5. The appellant was arrested and his wearing apparels were also seized as per seizure list vide Ext.7/2. Then the appellant was sent for medical examination on police requisition. The biological samples of the victim and of the appellant, collected by the respective Medical Officers, were seized by the I.O. Medical examination reports of the appellant and the victim were collected. The appellant was forwarded to the Court on 09.03.2014. The I.O. made a prayer before the learned S.D.J.M., Deogarh for sending the exhibits to R.F.S.L., Sambalpur. Accordingly, the same was done and on completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted under section 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant.

Prosecution & Defence Witnesses:

During course of the trial, in order to prove its case, the prosecution examined as many as fifteen witnesses.

P.W.1 Pratap Biswal is the scribe of the F.I.R. which was lodged by the victim. After scribing the same, he read over and explained the contents thereof to the victim.

P.W.2 Dusmanta Pradhan @ Dusha is the mill owner. He stated that on the