LAWS(ORI)-2000-4-22

SUDHANSU SEKHAR SAHOO Vs. STATE

Decided On April 21, 2000
SUDHANSU SEKHAR SAHOO Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant Sudhansu Sekhar Sahoo @ Sudhansu Kumar Sahoo has been convicted under Sec. 376 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years vide judgment dated 28-4-1994 in S.T. No. 20/9 of 1994 passed by Sk. Jan Hossain, Additional Sessions Judge, Bolangir. The said judgment is under challenge in this appeal.

(2.) The prosecution case briefly stated is as follows : The prosecutrix P.W.1 - Wife of P.W.5 and the appellant are co-villagers, being residents of village Nagaon, P.S. Tusura in the district of Bolangir. On 13-10-1993 morning P.W.1 accompanied by her husband (P.W. 5) went to the field and while P.W. 5 was cutting grass in the field, P.W. 1 went in another direction to tend cattle. It is alleged that at about 10 P.M. while P.W. 1 was sitting under a tree, watching her cattle, the appellant came from behind and physically lifted her to a house situated nearly, aggged her mouth and threatened her to murder and committed rape on her. P.W. 1 returned home and narrated the occurrence to her mother-in-law and wife of her husband's brother (P.W.2) who advised her not to inform P.W. 5. But on 17-10-1993 when P.W. 5 was informed about the occurrence, he fought with the appellant and on the same date P.Ws.1 and 5 went to Tusura P. S. and P.W. 1 orally reported the occurrence to the O.I.C. of the P.S. (P.W. 7) who reduced the same to writting (Ext. 3), registered the case and took up investigation. During the investigation P.W. 7 examined the witnesses, visited the spot, seized six pieces of broken bangles, seized the wearing apparels of the prosecutrix, sent the prosecutrix for medical examination, arrested the accused/ appellant and sent him for medical examination, seized the wearing apparels of accused/appellant, sent the seized wearing apparels for examination at the R.F.S.L., Sambalpur and after completion of investigation he submitted the charge-sheet against the appellant who stood his tial.

(3.) The defence plea is one of denial and false implication due quarrel with the prosecutrix regarding tending of cattle in the field and due to previous enmity with the husband of the prosecutrix.