NARAYAN SAHA Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants faced trial for alleged commission of offences punishable under Section 376 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'ipc'). The Trial Court found the accused- appellants guilty and sentenced each one to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each with default stipulation. The High Court, by the impugned judgment, affirmed the conviction and the sentence. The prosecution version, in a nut shell is as follows :

(2.) On 22.7.1989, the victim, a married women, aged about 20 years alighted from the bus and around 6 P. M. was proceeding towards her house on foot. When she reached near a banyan tree, the accused persons forcibly dragged her to a nearby jungle and after gagging her mouth, committed rape on her one after the other. She suffered the trauma for the whole night and in the early morning, she was dropped near Bhattapukur. Next day morning, the victim went to her maternal uncle's house wherefrom she was taken to her house by her husband when she disclosed the incident to her husband. She was moved to the hospital on 24.7.1989. The matter was reported to the police and FIR was recorded at the hospital on the version of the victim. She was examined by PW-5, the Doctor on 24.7.1989. Placing reliance on the evidence of PW-3, the Victim, the Trial Court found the accused persons guilty, ordered conviction and sentence, as noted above. The matter was carried in appeal before the High Court which did not bring any relief to the accused-appellants.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that there was unexplained delay of five days in reporting the matter to the police. Additionally, there was no corroboration to the evidence of the victim. The medical evidence does not lend any assurance to the testimony of the victim. It was further submitted that one of the accused persons had an amputed arm and it is highly improper that he would be able to control the victim facilitating rape by the coaccused in the aforesaid background, it is submitted that the conviction, as recorded, is not proper.