NANHAK YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 22.11.2003 passed by Shri Prakash Chadra Jaiswal, Additional Sessions Judge-V, Gaya in S.tr. No. 8/2002/18/ 2002 by which he convicted appellant Nan-hak Yadav and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years. He was also sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- within two months from the date of order and in case of default to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. In case of realisation of fine, Rs. 2,000/- was ordered to be paid to the State and the rest was directed to be paid to the victim girl.

(2.) Shortly stated the prosecution case is that in the night of 25.6.2000 informant Seema Kumari was sleeping along with her mother named Lachhia Devi and father in the room after taking supper. At about 10.30 p.m. appellant Nanhak Yadav entered into the room and repeatedly call her by name. Informant out of fear concealed herself under the cot. It is said that the appellant forcibly dragged her outside the room. Informant's parents began to raise alarm but he threatened to assault them by means of bomb in case of making halla and took the informant at the hill located near the water tank. The appellant then opened her salwar and pulled her on the ground. He also opened his own clothes and thereafter forcibly committed rape on her repeatedly against her will. When the informant tried to raise halla he threatened her with dire consequences. In the meantime people arrived there making halla whereupon the accused left the scene leaving pant and shirt. It is further alleged that due to rape committed by the appellant there was acute pain in her private part and her salwar got stained with blood. The fardbeyan of the informant was recorded by the police on 25.6.2000 at 3.30 hours at Civil Line police station, Gaya on the basis of which Civil Line P.S. Case No. 166/2000 dated 25.6.2000 under Section 376 of the Penal Code was registered. It appears that the police after investigation submitted charge-sheet on the basis of which cognizance was take on 11.8.2000 by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya. Thereafter the case was committed to the Court of Session. After trial the appellant was convicted and sentenced under Section 376 of the Penal Code. Against the said order of conviction and sentence the appellant has preferred the present appeal before this Court.

(3.) The defence of the appellant was total denial of the alleged occurrence and false implication of the case.