THE STATE Vs. RABI @ RABINDRA NAYAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Respondent having been acquitted of the charge under Sections 376(2)(f) read with 511 of the Indian Penal Code by the impugned Judgment and order dated 30.1.1999 passed in S.C. No. 27/98 (S.C. No. 204/98 -GDC) by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Berhampur, the State has preferred this appeal.

(2.) CASE of the prosecution is that the victim girl P.W.4, aged about 7 years, is the daughter of P.Ws. 2 and 3. The alleged occurrence took place on 11.12.1997. In the F.I.R. Ext.3 lodged by the victim's father P.W.2 on 12.12.1997, it was alleged that when the victim had gone to watch vegetable plants in the field at about 1 P.M. the Respondent subjected her to sexual intercourse by gagging her mouth. As a result, there was profuse bleeding from the victim's genital and she became unconscious. As the victim did not return home till evening the victim's mother P.W.3 went to the spot. Having found the victim lying unconscious P.W.4 sprinkled water on her face and removed the cloth with which her mouth had been gagged and thereafter brought the victim home. P.W.2 returned home at about 6.30 P.M. and was told about the occurrence upon which he went to the Respondent's father and reported about the matter. Respondent's father did not pay any heed to his complaint. Under such circumstances, he lodged the F.I.R. Ext.3 before D.W.1, the I.I.C. of Bhanjanagar Police Station who registered the case for commission of offences under Section 376(2)(f) of I.P.C. and entrusted the investigation to P.W.8 A.S.I, of Police. In course of investigation, witnesses were examined, seizures were effected and the victim as well as the Respondent were medically examined by doctors P.Ws. 9 and 10 respectively. D.W. 1 took over charge of investigation from P.W.8 and, upon completion of investigation, submitted charge -sheet against the Respondent for commission of offences under Sections 376(2)(f) read with 511 of I.P.C. Accordingly, the Respondent faced trial.

(3.) IN order to substantiate the charge the prosecution examined 10 witnesses in all apart from relying upon the documents marked Exts.1 to 11 and material exhibited M.Os. I and II. P.Ws. 2, 3, 4, 8, 9 and 10 have already been introduced in course of the narration of prosecution case. P.Ws. 1, 5 and 6 deposed regarding appraisal by victim's parents of the incident to the Respondent's father. P.W.1 testified also regarding seizure of the wearing apparels of the victim. P.W.7 is a Home Guard who accompanied the victim to hospital -D.W.1 was the only witness examined on behalf of the defence. Defence also, relied upon Ext.A the charge -sheet. Learned trial Court having found evidence of the victim girl as well as her parents to be inconsistent and contradictory and having observed that the allegation of rape is ruled out by the medical evidence available from P.W.9 as well as chemical examination report of the seized articles, held that the case has been concocted by P.Ws. 2 and 3 in order to avenge expulsion of P.W.3 from the village.