SK. JASIM Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal under Sec. 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the "Cr.P.C.") has been preferred by the sole appellant against judgment of his conviction and sentence passed in S.T. No. 367 of 2012. The sole appellant by judgment dtd. 10/6/2013 has been held guilty and convicted for commission of offence under Sec. 342 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [hereinafter referred to as the "I.P.C."]. By order dtd. 12/6/2013 the appellant under Sec. 342 of the I.P.C. has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for nine months and to pay a fine of Rs.800.00. In default in payment of fine he was further directed to undergo imprisonment for two months. Under Sec. 376 of the I.P.C. he has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000.00. In case of default in payment of fine he was directed to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. The appellant has been convicted and sentenced by Sri Santosh Kumar, learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, IV, Katihar ( hereinafter referred to as the 'trial judge") in S.T. No. 367 of 2012 (arising out of Azamnagar P.S. Case No. 98 of 2011).

(2.) Short fact of the case is that on 20/8/2011 a written report was submitted under the signature of the victim before the Officer -in -charge of Azamnagar Police Station. In the written report P.W. 8 (victim) disclosed that on the same day i.e. on 20/8/2011 in morning at about 8.00 A.M. she had gone to Eastern side of her village namely, Dhenaghat for the purposes of drying lUVh [a kind of fuel] which was just adjacent to her field where there was bamboo orchard. The wet lUVh which was kept inside bamboo orchard was being carried out and spread in the field for the purposes of its drying. Suddenly Md. Jasim (appellant) aged about twenty years, son of - Samiruddin, resident of village - Dhenaghat, P.S.- Azamnagar, District - Katihar came there and enquired from her about her mother and father to which she replied they had not come yet. In the meanwhile, forcibly he caught her and started to carry her towards bamboo orchard however she started raising hulla. Subsequently, appellant forcibly pushed cloth into her mouth and carried her inside bamboo orchard and laid her on ground. After removing her clothes he committed rape with her and fled away. On alarm raised by the informant her aunt- Roshni Khatoon ( P.W. 6) and uncle - Sk. Sairul (not examined) came from their field and from the place of occurrence they carried her to her village. The informant narrated regarding the said occurrence to her family members and villagers. Md.

(3.) During the trial to establish its case on behalf of prosecution altogether eight witnesses were examined. Out of eight witnesses P.W. 3 ( Md. Dablu) and P.W. 4 (Abdul Gaffar) were examined claiming to be eye witness to the occurrence whereas P.W. 2 ( Md. Aziz ) - uncle of victim, P.W. 6 -Roshni Khatoon (aunt of victim) and P.W. 7 - Md. Mokim @ Mojim were examined as if they had seen the appellant fleeing away. P.W. 2, P.W. 6 and P.W. 7 had claimed that they had seen appellant fleeing away from the place of occurrence. P.W. 5 -Dr. (Smt.) Laxmi Sen had examined the victim. The Investigating Officer namely - Md.