LAWS(ORI)-2019-9-23

LALA SAHU Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

Decided On September 18, 2019
Lala Sahu Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ORISSA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.07.1993 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Balangir in Sessions Case No. 41 of 1993. By the said judgment, the appellant (accused) has been convicted for offence under section 376 IPC and he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years.

(2.) The prosecution case in short is that on 11.7.92 afternoon the victim (P.W.2) then aged about 15 years had been to the river bank to collect flowers. When she was there with her minor sister, the accused in wait of the opportune moment caught hold of her and raped her. The matter being divulged by the victim at home, father of the victim P.W. 4 presented a written report before the OIC, Tusura Police Station in the district of Balangir on that very day, at 4.30 P.M. It led to the registration of P.S. Case No. 65 of 1992 and investigation commenced. On completion of investigation, charge sheet having been placed against the accused for his trial for commission of offence under section 376 IPC; he faced the trial. The plea of the defence is that of denial and false implication.

(3.) In the trial from the side of the prosecution, five witnesses have been examined. P.W. 2 is the victim whereas P.W. 4 is her father who is the informant in the case and had lodged the FIR (Ext. 3). P.W. 3 has been cited as post occurrence witness whereas P.Ws. 1 to 5 are the doctor and Investigating Officer respectively. No evidence has been led from the side of the defence. The prosecution besides leading the oral evidence as above has proved the FIR (Ext. 3), medical examination report of the victim (Ext.1), chemical examination report (Ext. 8), the report of the doctor (Ext.11) and other documents. The trial court on analysis of evidence has accepted the version of the victim and concluded that the prosecution has established its case against the accused in committing the offence under section 376 IPC beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the accused has been sentenced as aforesaid.