SUNIL PASWAN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Bereft of unnecessary details, the prosecution case as embodied in written report lodged on 16.01.2012 at 7.00 A.M. by Dinesh Prasad (P.W.1) being the father of the victim (P.W. 3) is that on the alleged date of occurrence they had taken meal together with the victim whereafter the informant went to sleep in one room of his house along with his wife (P.W.2) whereas the victim went to sleep in the adjoining room. At the dead of night, the appellant entered into the room of P.W.3 as the door of the room was unlocked, forcibly stuffed her mouth and lifted her in his arm and went to the adjacent place under a tree and forcibly committed rape on her. Her mouth was stuffed with a Gamcha (Scarf). Her garments were also torn. After the rape was committed the victim could remove the Gamcha from her mouth and raise an alarm which attracted the informant and his wife (P.W.2). An attempt was made to overpower the appellant who was hiding in the nearby bush, but he managed to escape by scaling over the wall and jumping into the courtyard of the neighbour Sadhu Yadav. Lodging of the FIR ignited investigation by P.W.8, who on finding the accusations true laid the charge-sheet whereon cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the court of sessions which gave rise to S.T. No. 502 of 2012 on the file of the learned 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Barh, Patna wherein charges were famed and read over/explained to the appellant to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The defence is complete denial of his implication in the crime. A suggestion was given to all the witnesses by the defence that both the appellant and the victim were locked in love affairs and they wanted to marry each other.

(2.) In order to bring home the guilt, the prosecution examined 09 witnesses. P.W. 1 is the father of the victim and the informant of the case. P.W. 2 is the mother of the victim. P.W.3 is the victim herself. P.W. 4 Dr. Kiran has examined the victim on 16.01.2012 at 2.30 P.M. and furnished the medical report (Ext.3) based on the finding on radiological test provided by the Dr. Bikash Chand Choudhary (P.W. 5). The result of the medical examination of the victim made by P.W. 5 is Ext. 4. P.W. 6 Karu Yadav, P.W.7 Madan Paswan and P.W. 9 Ram Prit Paswan were produced as independent witnesses to support the circumstances attending the prosecution case. However, the prosecution did not rely on them and they were tendered. P.W. 8 is the I.O. of the case who not only recorded the FIR but also visited the place of occurrence and made seizure of certain incriminating articles from the place of occurrence as well as recorded the statements of the witnesses. The trial court, on critical analysis of the evidence of P.Ws 1, 2, 3 and 8, found the charges levelled against the appellant proved beyond shadow of reasonable doubts and accordingly convicted the appellant under Sec. 376 I.P.C. and ordered to undergo life imprisonment besides directing to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000.00 to the rape victim. The present appeal is directed against the said judgment of conviction dated 05.02.2013 and order of sentence dated 06.02.2013.

(3.) We have heard Mr. Neeraj Kumar Sanidh in support of the appeal and Mr. S.N. Prasad for the State.