BHIMSEN BHOI @ PODH Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

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. Additional Sessions Judge, Titlagarh in S.C. No. 115 (B)/31 of 2004 convicting him for offence under Section 376, I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo. R.I. for a period of 7 years with payment of fine of Rs. 3,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.

(2.) Prosecution case is that the victim is a minor girl of 13 years of age stays in the same village where the appellant a married man with his family reside. One day in the month of Pausa during noon hour the appellant called the victim to his house through a boy of their village, namely, Raj Kumar Bag. At that time the wife of the appellant was absent in the house. It is said that the moment the victim entered into the house of the appellant, she was gagged by piece of cloth and then the appellant shutting the door from inside made her lie the floor, removed her wearing apparels and forcibly committed sexual intercourse. The appellant gave a threat of dire consequences as regards the risk to her life in case of her disclosure about it. So, the victim maintained silence. It is further alleged that after about 7 days the appellant again called the victim through a girl of their village and this time again he committed sexual intercourse in the house forcibly. A few days thereafter again in the noon hour, it is said that the appellant committed forcible sexual intercourse with the victim of a low land in an open field at the outskirt of the village when she was returning after attaining the call of nature. When the victim felt uneasy and fell ill; at that time being asked by her mother, she narrated the incident. So, she was taken to the Titlagarh Government Hospital for medical checkup when pregnancy of five months was detected. On the very next day a meeting was convened in the village at the instance of the parents of the victim. The appellant confessed his guilt in presence of village gentries. The villagers and parents of the victim then proposed that she be kept by the appellant in the house and maintained, that was not accepted. So, finally F.I.R. was lodged at the police station which initiated registration of a case. The investigation commenced thereafter. In course of investigation the victim and other witnesses were examined by the Investigating Officer. Both the appellant and the victim were sent for medical examination. Charge-sheet being submitted the appellant faced the trial.

(3.) During trial the appellant took the plea of complete denial and false implication. It is further stated that he has undergone family planning sterilization operation about 10 years back and had also the previous land dispute with the father of the victim. Prosecution examined 10 witnesses when the defence examined none. The victim is P.W. 1, P.Ws. 4 and 5 are her parents. A co-villager has been examined who is said to have attended the meeting as P.W.2. The scribe of the F.I.R. has come to the dock as P.W.3. The child witnesses belonging to the village have been examined as P.W.6, P.W.7 is a private Doctor who had conducted the pregnancy test at first, the other Doctor of the Government Hospital has been examined as P.W. 8. One seizure witnesses has come to the dock as P.W.9 and at last the investigating officer has been examined as P.W. 10. From the side of the prosecution, the F.I.R. has been admitted in evidence as Ext. 1, the medical examination report of the victim is Ext.6.