MANIA MANOF KUMAR BEHERA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant has challenged the judgment dated 15.12.1995 in Sessions Trial No. 201/25 of 1995 passed by Shri. K.V.C.Rao, Assistant Sessions Judge, Cuttack convicting the appellant under Section 376, Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of two months. The appellant has been found not guilty and acquitted of the charge under Section 363, IPC.

(2.) PROSECUTION case runs as follows :

(3.) IN order to bring home the charge against the appellant, prosecution has examined sixteen witnesses. P.W. 15 is the victim girl whose age has been assessed to be six years and her statement was not recorded since she could not give rational replies to the questions put to her by the trial Judge. It appears that she was a student of Standard I Class in the Ramadevi Sishu Vihar, Cuttack. P.W. 11 is the uncle of P.W. 15. P.W.4 is the private tutor of P.W. 15. P.W.1 is a resident of the same locality where the appellant and the victim resided. He has denied his knowledge regarding the occurrence in this case and has not supported the prosecution case. P.W.2 is a witness to the seizure but he has denied to have witnessed the seizure, though admitted his signatures on the two seizure lists (Exts. 1/1 and 2/1). P.W.3 is also a resident of the same locality who has stated to have gone to the house of the informant after hearing about the occurrence. P.W.5 is a resident of the same locality who has stated to have seen the appellant and the victim girl climbing the embankment of the river and to have enquired from them as to where they were going to which the appellant replied that he was taking the girl to see the river water. P.W.5 did not support the prosecution case and turned hostile and has been cross examined by the prosecution. P.W.6 denied his knowledge regarding the occurrence and turned hostile and has been cross examined by the prosecution. P.W.3 is a post occurrence witness. P.Ws. 7, 8, 9 and 10 are the witnesses to the seizure. P.Ws. 13 and 16 are the two medical officers who medically examined the victim girl. P.W. 14 is the Investigating Officer. The defence has examined none.