SANO MURMU Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Impugned judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Mayurbhanj (Baripada) passed in S.T. No. 112 of 1991 convicting the appellants under Section 376(2)(g) of I.P.C. and sentencing each of them to undergo R.I. for ten years is under challenge in this Criminal Appeal from Jail.

(2.) Case of the prosecution is that on 21-5-1991, victim Manka Hansda went to village Baghiatanger (Chunusahi) to attend marriage ceremony of daughter of one Ram Chandra Majhi. She took part in the tribal dance in the said ceremony. When darkness set-in she was returning home alone from the said dance. On the way, the accused persons (hereinafter referred to as "the appellants") caught hold of her. They dragged her towards Chununala. When she resisted and cried for help, they gagged her mouth with a towel. They tied her hands and carried her to a lonely land beyond Chununala. They laid her on the ground. Then one after another they committed rape on her. Thereafter they carried her to a place surrounded by bamboo clamps. One after another they again raped her there. As a result, she became unconscious. By the time she regained her consciousness, it was dawn. She found herself lying in the water of Chununala. She also found her gold and silver ornaments missing from her person. She untied the towel. She went to the house of her sister nearby. She narrated the incident to her sister. She took water given by her sister and after taking rest for some time she went to the house of her brother to whom she narrated the incident. Her brother took her to Choukidar who advised them to go to Police Station. Accordingly, they went to Police Station and lodged the report. Basing on the said report, police investigated into the case. On completion of investigation police submitted charge sheet against the appellants under Sections 376(2)(g) and 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) The appellants denied the charges. Appellant Sano set up a defence theory of enmity between him and the victim's brother, who did not pay money for taking handia on credit and he along with his sister implicated him falsely in this case.