STATE OF ORISSA Vs. S APPA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the State against the order dated 28th January, 1986 passed by the learned Asst. Sessions Judge, Rayagada acquitting respondent -accused persons from the charges under Sections 366 -A/376/379/506/34, I.P.C. in Sessions Case No. 22 of 1985.

(2.) THE prosecution allegation in Sessions Case No. 22 of 1985 was that the victim girl boarded the Gunupur -Rayagada bus at Parbatipuram bus -stand in the evening of 10.5.1985 for her journey to village -Ganganabalsa. The respondents who were the driver, helper and conductor of that bus respectively did not allow the victim girl to get down from the bus at Ganganabalsa and took her in the bus to Rayagada against her will. At Rayagada bus -stand also they did not allow her to leave the bus and after all the passengers got down, the respondent No. 2 spread some seat cushions on the floor of the bus, laid down the victim girl on those cushions, removed her clothes and committed sexual intercourse against her will uttering threat of dire consequences, if she resists. Respondent No. 1 then committed rape on the victim girl at the same place. It is alleged that after such sexual intercourse respondent No. 2 asked the victim girl to take food and sleep in the bus, but respondent No. 3 insisted that he would take her to the lodge situated nearby. When respondent No. 3 was taking the victim girl from the bus towards the lodge, the victim girl found some police persons present nearby and informed them about the incident. P.W.10 with the assistance of interpreter P.W.1 reduced the report of the victim girl into writing, treated that report as F.I.R. and registered P.S. Case No. 159 of 1985. Investigation was then conducted by the police authorities and charge -sheet was submitted under Sections 366 -A/376/379/506/34, I.P.C. against the respondents. After commitment, the said case was registered as Sessions Case No. 22 of 1985 and learned Asst. Sessions Judge, Rayagada who was entrusted with the trial of the case, framed charge under Section 366 -A, I.P.C. against all the respondents and in addition under Sections 376/379/506/34, I.P.C. against respondent Nos. 1 and 2. During trial the prosecution examined eleven witnesses and produced documents and material objects, which were marked Exts.1 to 16 and M.Os.I to XI respectively. The respondent accused persons neither examined any witness nor produced any document. On consideration of the evidence on record, learned trial judge came to the conclusion that the charges have not been substantiated beyond reasonable doubt and accordingly acquitted the respondents. Aggrieved, the appellant -State has filed the present appeal, after obtaining leave of the Court, challenging the said order of acquittal.

(3.) MR . Mishra, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant -State submitted that the evidence of the prosecutrix -P.W.6, doctors -P.Ws.7 and 11 and police officers -P.Ws. 8 to 10 along with medical reports and serological reports clearly established the charges of kidnap and rape against the respondents, but the trial Judge without appreciating these evidence properly, recorded the order of acquittal. According to him, impugned order is against weight of evidence on record and the settled norms of law.