TRINATH SAMAL Vs. STATE OF ORRISA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant from inside the jail has preferred this appeal challenging the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dhenkanal-Angul in S.T. No. 5-D of 1995 convicting him for offence under sections 376/323, I.P.C. read with section 3(1)(xi) of the S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years for the offence under section 376, I.P.C. and simple imprisonment for the offence under section 323, I.P.C. and section 3 (1) (xi) of the Act, for a period of one year and six months for the rest offences respectively with further stipulation with the sentence as to run concurrently.

(2.) Prosecution case is that on 1.5.1994 around 3 p.m. the victim P.W. 2 had been to Samarchhatia taila of her village Lahada for collecting Kendu leaves. There all of a sudden the appellant appeared and insisted to have sex with him, The victim offered her view in the negative. It is stated that the respondent thereafter forcibly caught hold of her, pulled her saree, and thereby fully unrobed her. He then made her lie on the ground. At this time, the victim physically resisted for which this appellant by means of a stone assaulted her several times. This made the victim to remain in a helpless condition. The appellant thereafter committed penetrative sexual assault upon the victim. It is also stated that the victim for sometime lost her consciousness and leaving the victim in that condition the appellant left the place. One Khandia Behera saw her and he then called one Bansi (P.W. 3), who went to that place and was surprised to see the victim in that condition. The victim is none other than his sister. Seeing her in that condition, he sprinkled water on her face. The victim then regained sense and disclosed the entire episode as to how the appellant assaulted her and finally fulfilled his sexual lust. First of all the victim was taken to the police station where P.W. 3 lodged the F.I.R. (Ext. 1). This necceciated registration of the case and commencement of investigation. In course of investigation, the victim and also the appellant were medically examined and their wearing apparels were seized and sent for chemical examination. The statement of the victim and other witnesses were also examined and finally on culmination of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the appellant to face his trial for the above offences in the Court below, which he faced.

(3.) In the trial the prosecution examined as many as seven witnesses. The victim has come to the dock as P. W. 2. As already stated P.W. 3 is her brother. The doctor who had first examined the victim is P.W. 5 where as the other doctor who had also the occasion to examine the victim on being referred to has been cited as P.W. 7. P.W. 1 is a co-villager of the victim and so also the P.W. 4. The Investigating Officer has been examined as P.W. 6. From the side of the defence one witness known as Khandia Behera has been examined. More importantly the prosecution in the case has also proved the F.I.R. (Ext. 1), injury reports of the victim has been marked as Exts. 2 and 9. The chemical examination report and also the serological report have been admitted in the evidence and marked as Exts. 11 and 12. Seizure list showing seizure of some broken plastic bangles, stones etc. has been tendered as evidence and marked as Ext. 5 along with those seizure lists regarding the seizure of the wearing apparels of the victim as well as the appellant.