MAHESHWAR SAHU Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JUDGMENT :- The sole appellant, Maheshwar Sahu, has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 28th April, 1995, passed by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Gumla, in Sessions Trial No. 137/90, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge has convicted the accused-appellant under Sections 376 and 312, I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo R. I. for seven years under Section 376, I.P.C. and to undergo R. I. for five years under Section 312, I.P.C. The sentences are to run concurrently.

(2.) In short, the case of the prosecution is that in the month of April 1989 at about 10' O clock in the day informant Tulaspati Kumari was alone in her house and in the meantime accused Maheshwar Sahu entered into her house and caught her and thrashed her on the ground, and raised her Sari and committed rape on her. When the informant raised alarm the accused shut her mouth by putting his hand on her mouth and also threatened her. The accused left her after his semen was discharged. The accused assured the informant that he would marry her. Thereafter also the accused came to the house of the informant on 2 to 3 days and committed rape on her. The accused always used to assure her that he would marry her. As the informant had two houses in the village, and so some times she lived in one house alone. As a result of rape committed by the accused Maheshwar Sahu the informant became pregnant and when the pregnancy had developed to about seven months and the informant was turning pale, her mother enquired about it and she asked Maheshwar Sahu to marry her and Maheshwar Sahu asked her to get the abortion done. The informant refused for abortion of pregnancy on which accused Maheshwar Sahu took out two tablets from his pocket and pushed the tablets in her mouth, and asked her to chew it and also threatned her. As the informant was alone in the house, she swallowed the tablets due to fear and at about 3 to 4 A. M. she aborted, and at that time her mother was also there. According to the informant, as stated in the F.I.R. this occurrence is of the month of September and thereafter her brother came from outside and enquired about it from Maheshwar Sahu and then Maheshwar Sahu fled away from the village. Therefter the informant lodged information at the police station on 21-10-1989. After investigation police submitted chargesheet against the accused. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the case and committed it to the Court of Session for trial.

(3.) The defence of the accused, according to the trend of cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses is that he has been falsely implicated in this case.