IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AT AGARTALA
Akil Abdul Hamid Kureshi, Arindam Lodh, JJ.
Laxman Debbarma - Appellants
Vs.
The State of Tripura - Respondent
Crl. A. (J) No. 35 of 2019
Decided On : 07-07-2020
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Sections-376(2)(i)/120B - Motor Vehicles Act - Section-181 – Criminal Procedure Code,1973 – Section 313 - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act - Section-6 – Offence of Murder – Criminal conspiracy – Charged - PW-2 was noticed by two morning workers on a road side under police station with profuse bleeding on her lower portion - Matter was informed to Jatanbari police station; police personnel rushed to spot and immediately shifted girl to nearby hospital - Police personnel informed matter to parents of victim (PW-2); they came to hospital when girl had narrated incident - Whether girl was a consenting party, it transpires that girl had faced serious injuries in and around her vagina, which, according to Court, is quite indicative that she was subjected to violent and forceful intercourse – Held, scientific expert that blood stain of cloth piece of victim having matched with blood stain found in cloth piece of accused-appellant being originated from a single source (Exbt. A) - Failure to give any satisfactory explanation as to how girl experienced such severe injuries in her private parts, form a complete chain without any gap, leading Court to arrive at an irresistible conclusion that it was accused-appellant, , who committed rape upon girl - Judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by learned Special Judge, Judicial District, in Special 05 (POCSO) of 2016 dated is upheld and affirmed - Hence, appeal fails and accordingly same stands dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Arindam Lodh, J.
1. The Convict, Laxman Debbarma @ Thunta has presented this appeal challenging the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 19.03.2019 passed by the learned Special Judge, Gomati Judicial District, Udaipur in case No. Special 05(POCSO) of 2016, whereby and whereunder, he was convicted under Section-6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act for short) and sentenced to suffer RI for 10(ten) years and to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/-.
BACKGROUND & RELEVENT FACTS:
2. PW-2 (hereinafter referred to as the "victim" or the "girl", according to context) was noticed by two morning workers on a road side under Jatanbari police station with profuse bleeding on her lower portion. The matter was informed to the Jatanbari police station; the police personnel rushed to the spot and immediately shifted the girl to nearby hospital. The police personnel informed the matter to the parents of the victim (PW-2); they came to the hospital when the girl had narrated the incident.
3. The mother of the victim (PW-1) accordingly, had lodged an oral ejahar inter alia, stating that on 20.04.2016 at about 7/8 pm Laxman Debbarma accompanied by Pilat Debbarma had taken away her minor daughter aged about 15 years by a bike with a view to go out from the road to a nearby house situated at a little distance but she was taken to a rubber garden near Chellagungmukh area and was forcibly raped. It was further stated that two friends namely, Pilat Debbarma and Raja Debbarma were also with them. She was taken to Natunbazar hospital and subsequently, considering her critical condition, her daughter was shifted to Udaipur District Hospital. Further complaint of profuse bleeding is oozing out from her private part. The said oral ejahar was reduced into writing and accordingly, an FIR being numbered 00016 dated 21.04.2016 was registered under Sections-376(2)(i)/120B of IPC read with Section-181 of the Motor Vehicles Act and Section-6 of the POCSO Act.
4. SI Rabindra Debbarma (PW-21) being endorsed, took up investigation and through interaction with the victim girl he came to know that she had a love affair with the appellant and on the previous night at about 7.30 pm both the appellant and his two friends brought her to Chellagungmukh by a motorcycle in a rubber garden and the appellant had raped her and on the following morning the appellant left her at Jatanbari market area in bleeding condition. The I.O. went to the house of Laxman Debbarma, but, he was not available. He returned to the police station and lodged one written ejahar at Natunbazar P.S. (Exbt. 17).
5. During investigation, he seized one pachra, one legging, one panty, one vial containing urethral swab and another vial containing vaginal swab of the victim from Dr. Tani Bhattacharjee (PW-20) by preparing a seizure list. He collected the medical report on the same day. Thereafter, he again visited the house of the appellant and his two friends namely, Pilat Debbarma and Raja Debbarma and arrested them. They were also medically examined and he seized nail scraping, dried blood sample, one part of dress containing seminal stain, two vials containing controlen swab from glans penis of Laxman Debbarma and collected blood sample of Pilat Debbarma and controlen swab of glans penis of Pilat Debbarma separately packed by preparing a seizure list (Exbt. 2/2). The investigating officer also seized motorcycle bearing registration No. TR-03-E-7108 in the name of Pilat Debbarma by preparing seizure list (Exbt. 3/2) and a mobile was also seized.
6. Thereafter, on 22.04.2016 he recorded the statements of Bulti Debnath under Section-161 Cr.P.C. and went to the District Hospital for dental examination of the victim which was earlier suggested by Dr. Tani Bhattacharjee, but, the same could not be done due to absence of dental surgeon. He further recorded the statement of other witnesses.
7. PW-22, Smt. Mina Kumari Debbarma, Dy. S.P. (Head Quarter) took up investigation on 12.0
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
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.