SHAMSHER AU Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by order dated 7-12-1990 of his conviction and sentence to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 376 of IPC passed by Sessions Judge. Katihar in Sessions Trial No. 114 of 1990 the sole appellant Shamsher Ali has preferred this appeal.

(2.) The case of prosecution in short is that on 11-8-1989 at about 5.00 p.m. when Jamila Khatoon (PW 7) a deaf and dumb girl aged about 20 years was returning from the house of one Mansoor Ali where she had gone to attend a marriage the appellant caught her and dragged her in a nearby paddy field threw her on the ground and stripped off her clothes and committed rape on her Jamila Khatoon in protest raised voice of gon-gon (a type of moaning sound) which was heard by Jubeda Khatoon (PW 4) who had gone to ease herself in a nearby field. Jubeda Khatoon then went to Informant Sattar Ali (PW 2) the brother of Jamila Khatoon and told him about the occurrence. Sattar Ali along with Nazrul Haque and Mozamil Haque (both not examined) came to the paddy field and found that the appellant was committing rape on his sister. On seeing the Informant and his companions the appellant fled away towards the village. The Informant found his sister Jamila Khatoon, lying naked on the ground who by gestures told the Informant that the appellant after throwing her on the ground had forcibly committed rape on her. On the next day i.e. 12-8-1989 at about 8.15 a.m. the Informant along with his sister Jamila Khatoon. Mansoor Alam (PW 8) and Md. Suleman (PW 6) went to Korha Police Station where he lodged the FIR (Ext. 2). The Police sent Jamila Khatoon for medical examination arid visited the place of occurrence recorded the statements of witnesses and after completing investigation submitted charge - sheet under Section 376 of IPC against the appellant. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions and the appellant was put on trial and charge - sheet under Section 376 of IPC has been framed.

(3.) The case of appellant before the Court below was that he had filed a complaint case in the Court of C.J.M. Katihar against Informant and for this reason he has been falsely implicated in this case. One witness on behalf of appellant has been examined.