GIRIDEB Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Though this matter was listed for orders on the question of bail, at the request of learned counsel for parties, the case was taken up for final disposal. It needs to be mentioned here that while rejecting the prayer for bail by order dated 22-7-1993, the matter was directed to be listed for hearing on 23-8-1993. Thereafter also the matter was in the hearing list, but the same could not be taken up. The appellant had moved subsequently for bail. While rejecting the application for bail on 30-3-1994, the appeal was directed to be heard on 4-4-1994. On 14-91994, the appeal was adjourned to 20-9-1994 for hearing at the request of learned counsel for appellant. On 20-9-1994 the case was also adjourned at the request of learned counsel for appellant. When the prayer for bail was pressed into service today, with consent of learned counsel for parties it was taken up for final disposal.

(2.) The appellant (also described as accused) faced trial alleged commission of offence punishable under sections 376/323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in short I.P.C. Accusations which led to trial of the appellant in essence are as follows: On 13-9-1991, information was lodged by the informant P.W. 1, whose name need not be mentioned, alleging that on the previous night at about 2 p.m. she along with her husband and younger daughter had been to market as well as for treatment of her daughter. First they went to market. As the doctor was absent in village Khadam, she along with her husband and daughter thought of returning home. On the way father of the accused stopped them and requested them to stay in his house. Since they were related to him, they accepted the request. In the night they slept in the house of father of the accused. At about 8 p.m. when her husband was fast asleep, and the lamp was burning, suddenly the accused put out the lamp and lay on her. She questioned as to what was his intention. At this the accused put an iron rod on her throat, and threatened to do away with her life if she raised any dispute. On hearing this, her husband P.W. 6 woke up and when he questioned the accused, he was given a blow on his head by the accused with the iron rod, resulting in injuries. He became senseless because of the injuries. After he had become senseless, the accused brought a rope and tied him in a pole after dragging his outside. When the victim along with her younger daughter and son aged about 7 years tried to come out from the house, the accused pushed the victim inside the house. While the victim along with her children was inside the house, the accused raped her in front of the children in spite of their protest. The wife of the accused came there and asked the accused not to leave her without rape. Some amount of money and ear rings were lost. After victims husband regained his sense he went to the house of one Bibhisan, and Bibhisans wife (P.W. 5) gave a saree to the victim to wear. Information was lodged at Lakhanpur Police Station. The victim as well as the wife of the accused were sent for medical examination. On completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted and the accused faced trial. The accused pleaded innocence and stated that on account of quarrel between his wife and the victim, the latter had sustained injuries and with a view to harass him the case has been Instituted.

(3.) Ten witnesses were examined to further the prosecution case. P.W. 1 is the victim, and P.W. 6 is her husband, and their son is P.W. 7, Who was aged seven years at the time of examination, P.W. 8 is the doctor who has examined the victim, P.W. 5 is the wife of Bibhisan, and P.Ws. 2,3 and 4 are co-villagers. Two witnesses were examined in support of accusedTs stand.