TUNA ALIAS SUDARSAN NAIK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner, accused of committing rape, has filed this petition for his release on bail. Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner urges that the alleged sexual intercourse with the victim girl being with her consent, as pointed out by the doctor in her report, no offence under Section 376, Indian Penal Code is made out. It would appear from the doctor's report that in the column 'History' she has noted, " According to the statement of the girl she had love affairs with the boy and had sexual intercourse since 1 month.". In view of this, notice was issued to her to show -cause under what circumstances she could record the statement of the victim girl. In her reply she has referred to" the printed form where she is required to give brief history of the case as given by the examinee (meaning thereby the victim). On a scrutiny of the printed form I find that such a column is there. In the circumstances, no fault can be found with the doctor in mentioning the history of the case in her report. But then possibility of misuse of such column by the doctor while giving opinion may not be ruled out. Needless to mention that doctor's report is merely an expert opinion, as provided under Section 45 of the Evidence Act. It is, therefore, not necessary to have such a column in the printed form meant for giving the report. Accordingly steps should be taken by the State. Government to delete the same from the printed form.

(2.) IN the case in hand, it is the consistent case of the prosecution coupled with the victim's version recorded during investigation and the medical examination report that the victim was sexually molested by the Petitioner. In that view of the matter, I am not inclined to grant bail as prayed for. Accordingly prayer for bail is rejected and the Criminal Misc. Case is dismissed.