BHUTKUN DAS @ SATENDRA DAS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant Bhutkun Das @ Satendra Das has been found guilty for an offence punishable under Section 376/ 511 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years as well as to pay fine appertaining to Rs.10, 000/- and in default thereof, to undergo S.I. for two years, additionally, vide judgment of conviction dated 17.04.2015 and order of sentence dated 20.04.2015 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-9th, Gaya in Sessions Trial No.71 of 2014.

(2.) Name withheld, victim (PW-5) , filed written report on 06.09.2011 alleging inter alia that she happens to be a nine years old kid and resides with her maternal grandfather-mother at villageBarua. Her parental house is at village-Bagahi, P.S. Fatehpur, DistrictGaya. On 31.08.2011 at 7.00 p.m. while she had gone to maize field of Janki Sah for meeting nature's call and had sat to ease herself during course thereof, Bhutkun Das @ Satendra Das, son of Sarju Das came from behind, threw her on the ground and jumped over her belly. She raised alarm, whereupon he tried to gag her mouth with one hand and with the other, he tried to untie her string, she again cried as a result of which, Janki Sao, who was near about, rushed and seeing whom, Bhutkun Das escaped leaving her. Janki Das rushed to apprehend him, but he managed to escape. On the alleged date, her parents were at Dhanbad, so she submitted that in order to commit rape, Bhutkun Das has indulged in such kind of activity, but was saved on account of timely arrival of Janki Sao. Because of the fact that no responsible person was at the house to inform the police, whereupon after arrival of her father, she along with her maternal grandmother Sukri Devi come to police station to file complaint. Accordingly, Fatehpur P.S. Case No.221 of 2011 was registered on the basis of the aforesaid written report, whereupon investigation commenced and after culminating the same, chargesheet was submitted, facilitating the trial, meeting with ultimate result, subject matter of instant appeal.

(3.) Defence case, as is evident from mode of crossexamination as well as statement recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. is that of complete denial. Furthermore, it has also been submitted that on account of land dispute with Jagan Sao, maternal grandfather of the informant, this false case has been instituted at his instance. However, nothing has been adduced in defence.