The court upheld conviction for grievous hurt where sufficient evidence was present but reversed convictions under sexual assault and firearms misuse due to lack of proof.

JUDGMENT :

S.S. Mishra, J.

The present Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 31.01.1994 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Paralakhemundi in Sessions Case No.23 of 1993, whereby the appellant was convicted under Sections 451 , 354 and 325 IPC (the charge under Section 307 having been altered to Section 325 ), Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3(1)(xi) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. He was sentenced to 2 years R.I. under Section 451 , 7 years R.I. under , and 7 years R.I. under of the Arms Act. No separate sentence was given for Section 354 . Additionally, he received 5 years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 2,000/- (with 6 months S.I. for default) under Section 3(1)(xii) of the SC & ST (POA) Act. He was acquitted of the charge under Section 376 .

2. The present appeal has been pending since 1994. When the matter was called for hearing consistently, none appeared for the appellant. Therefore, on 10.02.2026, this Court requested Ms. Rakhi Mishra, learned counsel, who was present in Court to assist the Court as Amicus Curiae. She has readily accepted the same and after obtaining entire record, assisted the Court very effectively. This Court records appreciation for the meaningful assistance rendered by Ms. Mishra.

3. Heard Ms. Rakhi Mishra, learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant and Mr. Sobhan Panigrahi, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State.

4. The prosecution case in brief is that on 18.11.1992 at about 6.00 P.M., a platoon of 3rd Battalion OSAP, including the present appellant, was proceeding towards Gangabada Anti-Naxalite Camp. On the way, near Benga Sahi village, the appellant allegedly entered the dwelling house of the informant (P.W.1), an Adivasi woman belonging to the Scheduled Tribe community. At that time, P.W.2 (Sebati), another tribal woman, was present with her. Their husbands were reportedly away from home.

5. According to the FIR version, the appellant enquired about the whereabouts of the husbands of P.W.1 and P.W.2. Upon learning that they were not present, he allegedly dragged P.W.1. When she raised alarm, the appellant fired from his service rifle, as a result of which she sustained a gunshot injury on her left arm near the elbow. Out of fear, she took shelter in a neighboring house. The matter was reported on the following day.

6. During investigation, an additional allegation emerged that after P.W.1 escaped, the appellant caught hold of P.W.2 and committed forcible rape upon her. On the basis of such allegations, charge-sheet was submitted for the alleged commission of offences under Sections 450 /376/354/307 IPC , Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3(1)(xi) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

7. The Investigating Officer seized the service rifle, bayonet, 19 live cartridges and one empty cartridge case from the appellant. Pellets were allegedly recovered from inside the house of the informant. A Test Identification Parade (T.I. Parade) was conducted during the investigation.

8. The defence plea was that while proceeding to camp, the platoon suspected Naxalite presence and brought their rifles to firing position. The appellant claimed that he momentarily went aside to attend the call of nature and, while moving hurriedly thereafter, his hand accidentally came into contact with the trigger, causing misfiring. He denied entering the house with any criminal intent and denied the allegation of rape.

9. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined 26 witnesses including the informant (P.