RAMROOP DAS Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The factual matrix of this appeal is a sordid and obnoxious incident, where the accused, a Headmaster has allegedly gratified his animated passions and sexual pleasure by sexually assaulting and molesting in utter disregard of universal moral code, human dignity a young, frail student aged about 10 years and has thereby besmirched the most respected relationship of a teacher with his pupil. As observed by the Supreme Court in Madan Gopal Kakkad v. Naral Dubey, 1992 (2) Crimes 168 such offenders are menance to the civilised society.

(2.) We do not propose to mention the name of the victim. Section 228-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, the 'IPC') makes disclosure of identity of victim of certain offence punishable. Printing or publishing name of any matter which may make known the identity of any person against whom an offence under Sections 376, 376A, 376B, 376C or 376D is alleged or found to have been committed can be punished. True it is, the restriction does not relate to printing or publication of judgment by High Court or Supreme Court. But keeping in view the social object of preventing social victimisation or ostracism of the victim of a sexual offence for which Section 228A has been enacted, it would be appropriate that in the judgments, by High Court or lower Court, the name of the victim should not be indicated. We have chosen to describe her as 'victim' in the judgment. What is there in a name after all. The accused bears the name of 'Lord Rama' but has committed an act which shall put to shame a devil.

(3.) Filtering out unnecessary details of the shameless intrigue as unfolded by prosecution during trial is as follows : On 11-4-1987 at about 2.30 p.m. the victim was in the quarters of her father (P.W. 1), with her mother (P.W. 3). A small boy student (P.W. 4) of her school, of which the accused was the Headmaster came to her house and asked her to go to the accused Headmaster as she had been called by him. When the victim told her mother that the Headmaster had sent for her, she was permitted to go. She went to the quarters of the Headmaster, thinking that she was called for in connection with her studies. The Headmaster had however, other ideas. As soon as the victim reached the quarters, immediately she was taken inside by the accused to a room. He closed the room by shutting its door and gagged her mouth, laid her flat on the bed with her face upwards and undressed her and sexually ravished her. There was profuse bleeding and her pant was drenched with blood. Thereafter, accused opened the door and asked her to go out. With such difficulty the victim put on the blood drenched pant and proceeded to her house. She was also most in senseless condition with profuse bleeding, and tears were rolling down from her eyes, and she described the entire occurrence to the mother. At that time her father was present. They were thoroughly perplexed at such unusual beastly conduct of the accused. They were panic stricken being faced with the traumatic situation. The father informed the neighbours about the act. At that time, accused appeared, begged mercy and requested the persons present not to precipitate any action. The alarming condition of the girl compelled her parents to carry her to Koida Government Hospital for her treatment. The matter was reported at the Koida P. S. and investigation was undertaken. The accused was examined on the next day. Possibility of recent intercourse was not excluded. On completion of investigation, chargesheet was submitted under Section 376, IPC. The accused pleaded not guilty though he did not give any specific plea as to how he was falsely implicated for such heinous crime.