THAKARA BESRA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the appellants have been convicted under Section 376 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years for having committed tape on the prosecutrix(P.W.I)

(2.) Shortly stated, that prosecution case is that in the night of 4/5.11.1989 while the prosecutrix (P.W. 1) was sleeping in her one roomed house along with her three years old son, she heard some body calling her son Mangulia. From the voice she could know that the person calling her son was accused-appellant Baya Tudu. Since it was dead of night, she did not unchain the door particularly when her husband was not there in the house, being away from the village. Sometime thereafter both the accused-appellants entered into the house through a hole created by them in the roof by removing some thatch. They put out the DIBRI which was burning and forcibly committed sexual intercourse with her. As a result of the sexual assault, there was bleeding injury in her private part and for all these her say a (M.U.I.V) became stained with blood and semen. After satisfying their sexual appetite the accused-appellants took to their heels through the front side by opening the Tati door. Immediately after the departure of the appellants, P.W. 1 raised hue and cry and on hearing her scream, her neighbour Anadi Behera (not examined) having arrived near her house, she disclosed the incident to him. In the following morning at 10.30 A.M. she went to Baliapal Police Station covering a distance of about 7 K.Ms. and lodged the F.I.R., Ext. 4. In course of investigation, the police seized the wearing saya of the prosecutrix and also the Kantha (M.O.I) and mat (M.Q.II) on which she was sleeping and sent the accused and the injured for medical examination. The saya (M.OIV) which was sent for chemical examination was found to have stained with human blood and semen and after completion of investigation charge-sheet having been placed and the case having been committed, both the accused appellants faced trial for the offence punishable under Section 376 I.P.C.

(3.) The defence was one of denial. No witness was, however, examined on behalf of the defence.