TORO MURMU Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed against the judgment and order of 5th Addl. Sessions Judge, Dumka in Sessions Trial No. 378 of 1985/5 of 1985. By the impugned judgment dated 19th September, 1987 the learned Addl. Sessions Judge convicted the appellant under S.376 of the Indian Penal Code and also under S.323 of the Indian Penal Code and by a subsequent order of the same day the learned trial court sentenced him to undergo R.I. for ten years under S.376 of the Indian Penal Code and to undergo R.I. for three months under S.323 of the Indian Penal Code. However, both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THE facts of the case, in brief, are as follows. On 27th of June, 1985 at 8.30 P.M. one Suko Devi, wife of Fulchan Maraiya of village Rajhan within the P.S. Borio in the district of Sahebganj turned up at the Police Station, Borio and gave her statement. She was also accompanied by some of her family members including her brother in law Rasik Maraiya (P.W. 2). She stated that on the same day she had gone to deliver a Sama to the place of the appellant Toto Murmu. The Sama was prepared by her husband, who happened to be a Blacksmith. When the informant arrived at the place of Toro Murmu she saw him sitting in his house along with his brother Ter Murmu consuming liquor. As soon as the informant arrive there the appellant Toro Murmu caught her hand and dragged her inside his house and his brother Ter Murmu went away. Thereafter the appellant felled her on the ground and after removing her underclothes started committing rape. The informant victim tried to rescue herself, but she could not succeed. When the appellant committed rape, he left her. She, however, raised alarm at the time of rape, but no one arrived there. She came to her house and narrated the story to her husband, Fulchand Maraiya (P.W. 3), thereupon her husband took his brother Rasik Maraiya (P.W. 2) alongwith him and went to the place of the appellant, Toro Murmu, and on their complain Toro Murmu assaulted them with lathi. Thereafter the informant went to the Police Station and lodged information on which F.I.R. (Ext. 2) was drawn up and a case under S.376 and S.323 IPC was registered. The victim was sent to the local hospital for her examination and the Investigating Officer on the following day visited the P.O. and inspected the same and he recorded the statements of the witnesses and subsequently, after completing investigation he submitted charge sheet in this case. Accordingly, cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions and the trial commenced before the 5th Addl. Sessions Judge, Dumka, who concluded the trial and delivered the judgment and passed the judgment and order, as stated above.

(3.) IT appears that in this case altogether five witnesses were examined by the prosecution to support the charge framed against the appellant. Out of these five witnesses, P.W. 4 Sadhusaran Singh happens to be the I.O. of the case. He was A.S.I. of Police in Borio P.S. on 27 6 1985 and in his presence the informant reported the matter on the basis of which F.I.R. was drawn up under the orders of the Officer In charge of the Police Station and the investigation was entrusted to him. Accordingly, he took up the investigation and recorded the further statement of the prosecutrix and the statements of the other witnesses, who had come along with her and on the following day he went to the P.O. and inspected the same and recorded the statement of P.W. 3, Fulchand Maraiya, the husband of the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix was also sent to the local doctor for her examination and under cloth worn by the victim at the alleged time of offence was also seized by him and he prepared a seizure list (Ext. 3) and according to the I.O. he had also sent the seized cloth for chemical examination to Forensic Science Laboratory, Bihar, Patna but the report of the chemical examination of the cloth could not be received. However, on completing investigation he had submitted charge sheet in this case.