STATE OF ORISSA Vs. PICHIKA PARVATISAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RESPONDENT has been acquitted of the charge under Section 376, Indian Penal code. The prosecution case is that the accused, a minor boy of 16 years, took the victim girl aged 6 years to his house while she was playing in the afternoon of 255-1960, first made her to sit on a wooden plant and then made her sleep with face downwards on a paddy heap inside that room, and thereafter the accused inserted his penis into her private pacts. Her frock become blood-stained and she felt extreme pain and cried aloud. The accused consoled her by giving a pie. The girl then came out to the outer verandah of the house of the accused when suryakanto a neighbour girl, (not examined) saw the blood on her frock and called p. W. 6 the mother of the victim girl. The girl narrated the story of rape to her mother. On getting information the father of the girl, who was a vaccinator, came to the spot and P. W. 2 narrated the same story to her father (P. W. . 4 ). P. W. 2 was taken to the hospital at Raygada at a distance of about 3 miles. After examination the medical officer directed P. W. 4 to lodge a report at the police station. P. W, 4 lodged the first information report. The Officer in charge seized the frock and sent the victim to the medical officer for examination, P. W. 1 the doctor, examined her and found an abrasion 1/3" long on the upper part of the labia minora just above 1/2" or even less to the left side of the clitoris of the victim girl. He also found streaks of dried blood on the inner side of both the thighs, knees and the legs of the victim who complained of pains on her private parts. Her cloths had blood clots. He preserved a swab from the vagina of the victim girl and sent it to the Chemical examiner, Calcutta, on police requisition. He sent the pant (M. O. II) worn by the accused for medical examination. The doctor on examination of the accused ascertained his age to be between 14 to 16 years. The accused had pubic hair of 11/2" long and his penis was well developed and had recent laceration and rupture of frenum of his penis. The inside of the prepuce and glans was clear and free from smegma. The penis had a laceration which was a sign of violence. The age of the laceration was about 40 hours at the time of examination on 27-5-1960.

(2.) THE accused admitted that the victim girl came to his house for playing, but stated that while playing she fell down on a Pidha near the paddy heap and that the injuries and the bleeding on the girl were due to accidental fall on the Pidha which had a protruding nail. The injury on his penis was explained to be due to a boil on it one month prior to the occurrence.

(3.) THE learned Assistant Sessions Judge acquitted the accused after discarding the prosecution evidence. The victim (P. W. 2) deposed in the committing Court that she was sitting in the room on a Pidha with some protruding nails and that she had bleeding injuries in her private part which came in contact with the protruding nail. As her statement before the Committing court was substantive evidence and there was conflict between her statement in the Committing court and in the sessions Court, the learned Assistant Sessions Judge was not inclined to place reliance on her evidence. As the medical officer (P. W. I) deposed that the injuries on the private part of the victim would be possible it a protruding nail on the Pidha comes in contact with it, the learned Assistant Sessions Judge did not attach much importance to the injuries, bleeding and the blood stains on the pyjama of the accused arid the frock of the girl. Though the analysis and the judgment of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge are somewhat confused, on perusal of the materials on record we cannot say that his view was an unreasonable one. We are therefore not inclined to interfere with the order of acquittal.