VANLALBELA Vs. STATE OF MIZORAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned Judge, Fast Track Court Aizawl in GR Case No. 283/98 holding the petitioner guilty of the offence U/s. 376(f) IPC and convicting him under that Section with the sentence to undergo RI for six years with fine of Rs. 3000/-, in default RI for another period of three months. The prosecution story in brief is that on 07.07.97 the father of the victim girl (PW 1) lodged an FIR with the Kawnpui police out post alleging that his daughter, i.e. the victim girl aged 11 years and 6 months was raped by the accused/ appellant on 10.06.95 when she visited his house. She being afraid to disclose the incident under threat of the appellant, the matter was not reported and the informant could come to know about the same when the appellant himself disclosed the offence in a drunken condition. The FIR further disclosed that the informant i.e. the father of the victim girl upon hearing about the incident became furious and sent a messenger to the appellant for arriving out a compromise on payment of Rs. 5000/- as compensation. Since the appellant did not agree to the proposal so made, the informant lodged the FIR.

(2.) On the basis of the aforesaid FIR the police registered KLB P.S. case No. 192/97 dated 21.07.97 U/s. 376 (f) IPC. The Investigating Officer (I.O.) engaged in the case upon investigation submitted charge sheet against the accused/appellant stating the date of the occurrence was 10.05.97 as against the date disclosed by the first informant as 10.06.95. The charge sheet was submitted U/s. 376 (f) IPC. G.R. Case No. 283/99 was registered and the Trial Court proceeded with the matter. Altogether six witnesses were examined by the prose-cution and the accused/appellant was examined U/s. 313 Cr.P.C. Exhbts. PI and P2 are the FIR and the medical examination report respectively. It will be pertinent to mention here that although a birth certificate certifying the date of birth of the victim girl as 03.01.84 is available on record, but the same was not an exhibited document in the trial. On perusal of the records including the depositions made by the prosecution witnesses, it appears that there is no eye witness to the alleged incident. However, the victim girl in her deposition stated about the incident as narrated in the FIR. The Trial Court on the basis of the deposition made by the prosecution witnesses, more particularly the deposition made by the victim girl, convicted the appellant U/s. 376(f) IPC and passed the aforesaid sentence. Hence this appeal.

(3.) I have heard Mr. George Raju, learned counsel for the appellant and Ms. Dinari T. Azyu, learned P.P., Mizoram. Referring to the circumstances involved in the case, more particularly the delay in lodging the FIR which is more than two years, Mr. Raju, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that such delay itself is fatal to the prosecution case. As regards the date of the incident, learned counsel also referred to the discrepancy in the FIR and the charge sheet. While in the FIR the date of the incident was stated to be on 10.06.95. in the charge sheet the same was stated to be on 10.05.97.