SHYAM SUNDAR BEHERA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 15.4.1999 passed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge cum C.J.M., Bolangir in Sessions Case No. 13 B/2 of 1998 convicting the appellant for commission of offence under Section 376 of the Penal Code and sentencing him to imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs. 2000/ , in default, to undergo further R.I. for one year.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that the victim girl, her mother, younger sister and younger brother were staying in their own house at Kulthipali. Since 1992 the father of the victim was serving sentence in a dacoity case and was therefore not staying with the victim and her other family members at the time of occurrence. On the date of occurrence, the mother of the victim, her younger sister and younger brother had gone Nuapali but did not come back home at night. Since the victim was alone at home, she closed all the doors and slept inside. At about 10.00 P.M. having heard the sound of someone walking in the verandah and sound of the light being switched off, she came out of the room to the verandah to verify with a lamp in her hands. She saw the appellant trying to open the back side verandah and since the victim knew him, she asked the appellant as to why he was trying to enter into the house. It is further alleged that all on a sudden the appellant caught hold of her, shut her mouth by putting hand, threatened her and forcibly laid her on the ground, committed rape by force and decamped by scaling over the back side wall. On the next day when the mother and younger brother of the victim came back home, she narrated the entire incident to her mother and her mother raised hulla in the village and went to the bus stand to proceed to Bolangir for lodging a report. At about 2.30 P.M. the younger brother of the victim girl came to the bus stand to ascertain as to whether the mother of the victim went to Bolangir or not, but found the broken bangles and chappals of his mother lying on the road near the bus stand. Thereafter, he collected those materials and returned home crying. The mother of the victim did not return home till next day morning as a result of which the victim came to Bolangir on 24.12.94 to the house of her maternal uncle to ascertain about her mother, but did not find her there. The victim thereafter went to the Police Station with her maternal uncle and lodged the F.I.R. On the basis of the allegations made in the F.I.R., investigation was taken up and charge sheet was submitted for commission of offence under Section 376 of the Penal Code. The plea of the appellant is one of denial.

(3.) THE learned counsel Shri Sahoo appearing for the appellant submitted that there is no evidence on record except the statement of the victim girl with regard to commission of rape and, therefore, without any corroboration from any other quarter, the appellant could not have been convicted for commission of the offence under Section 376 of the Penal Code merely on the statement of the prosecutrix. Shri Sahoo further submitted that the victim has developed the story at the time of her examination in Court though certain allegations made during her examination did not find place in the F.I.R. He also referred to some contradictions in the deposition of the victim and submitted that the victim cannot be relied upon entirely for the purpose of conviction in absence of any corroborative material. The learned counsel for the State on the other hand, submitted that even though the medical evidence does not support the prosecution case of rape, there is nothing to disbelieve the prosecutrix and the contradictions pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant are irrelevant for the purpose of the case and, therefore, since the prosecutrix evidence is believable and trustworthy, in absence of any corroboration from any other quarter also, conviction under Section 376 would lie.