DILIP BHAGAT Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DILIP Bhagat, the sole appellant in this appeal before us, has assailed the judgment dated 26.8.1997 and order dated 27.8.1997 of the Court below convicting and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years under Sections 376/511 and life imprisonment under Section 302, Indian Penal Code, Both the sentences have been ordered to run consecutively in the manner that sentence under Sections 376/511, Indian Penal Code will start first and, thereafter the sentence under Section 302 will start.

(2.) THE case of prosecution, in short, is that on 2.10.1996 at about 3 p.m., when deceased Renu Kumari alongwith her younger sister, was at the Darwaza of her house, appellant, who is her neighbour, pushed her in her courtyard in order to commit rape on her. Deceased resisted the appellant with her full capacity and the appellant, therefore, could not succeed and he then brought kerosene oil in a bottle and a match box from his house and sprinkled the kerosene oil on deceased Renu Kumari and lighting a match stick set fire on her clothes and, thereafter, he fled away. On hulla raised by deceased, grandmother, brother, uncle of deceased, wife of Haridwar Bhagat and others came there and the deceased narrated them the incident. On account office, deceased received burn injuries on her face, arms, chest, neck, feet and her entire body. She was taken to hospital by her uncle and neighbours. On the day of occurrence at about 5 p.m., the fardbayan (Exhibit-1) of deceased was recorded by Assistant Sub-Inspector Braj Bhushan Choubey (P.W. 10) and on the basis fardbayan (Exhibit-1), formal First Information Report under Sections 376/511, 307 and 326, Indian Penal Code was drawn against the appellant. At about 7 p.m. on the day of occurrence, the deceased succumbed to burn injuries and, thereafter, Section 302, Indian Penal Code was added to the First Information Report. THE police, after investigation, submitted charge-sheet against the appellant and after taking cognizance, the case was committed to Court of Session were charges under Sections 376/511 and 302, Indian Penal Code were framed against the appellant who was put on trial as he denied the charges and aftertnal, he was found guilty and convicted and sentenced, as stated above. No witness on behalf of the appellant was examined before the Court below but from the trend of cross-examination of prosecution witnesses, the case of appellant appears to be of his complete innocence and his false implication in this case.

(3.) LAL Bahadur Roy (P.W. 9), in his evidence, has said that on 2.10.1996, he was posted as Sub-Inspector at Aurangabad Town Police Station and on that day, Assistant Sub-Inspector Braj Bhushan Choubey (P.W. 10) brought fardhayan of deceased from Sadar Hospital on the basis of which he registered as case and took up the investigation. He has said that at about 6.30 p.m. on the day of occurrence, he visited the place of occurrence, which is the house of deceased consisting of two rooms, one with buck walls and Pucca roof and another having mud walls and tiled roof. In this tiled roof room, he found burnt pieces of clothes, half burnt hairs of head and roof bush and he was told that in this loom, the appellant had set fire to the body of deceased. He has said that he recorded the statements of some witnesses at the place of occurrence and he seized burnt pieces of clothes, burnt hairs of head, burnt soil and ashes of burnt clothes and prepared seizure list. He has proved the carbon copy of seizure list which, according to him, was prepared alongwith original in the same process with carbon. This seizure list is marked Exhibit-4. He has also proved in Court the pieces of burnt clothes (Material Exhibit-I), half burnt hairs (Material Exhibit-II) and burnt soil (Material Exhibit-III). He has further said that he recorded the statement of Braj Bhushan Choubey (P.W. 10) and after completing investigation, submitted charge-sheet.