NEYAZ AHMAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JUDGMENT :- The sole appellant Neyaz Ahmad has been sentenced to undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Siwan in Sessions Trial No. 164 of 1993 by his judgment and order dated 11th April, 1994. The victim in this case was a minor girl aged about 9 years who is said to have been raped by the appellant on 19-10-92 inside his Ata Chakki at about 12.30 p.m. at village Daraila which falls within the jurisdiction of Guthani Police Station which was at a distance of 71/2 kilometers from the village of occurrence. Several witnesses have been examined to prove the prosecution case including the victim, minor Sangita, who was examined as PW 2. The mother of the victim Prem Kumari PW 3, the grandmother of the victim Malti Devi PW 4, grandfather of the victim Brij Kishore Kalwar PW 5 and the father of the victim Nathuni Prasad Kalwar PW 7 have supported the prosecution case and have corroborated the testimony of the victim girl inasmuch as the victim girl had reported the incident to them as soon as they met. Apart from this, the prosecution has also relied upon the statement of the victim recorded by Judicial Magistrate under S. 164, Cr. P. C. on 12-11-92 which fully corroborates the version set out in the first information report. Surprisingly the doctor who examined the victim girl and the Investigating Officer who conducted the investigation were not examined as prosecution witnesses but the Court summoned them as Court witnesses and they have been examined as CWA and CWB, respectively. The Court had also summoned as a Court witness the Judicial Magistrate who recorded the statement of the victim girl under Section 164, Cr. P. C. and he has deposed as CWC. There are two formal witnesses - PW 1 who proved the formal F.I.R. drawn up in the case and PW 6 Ishwar Singh, a Constable who produced the material exhibits before the Court.

(2.) The occurrence giving rise to this appeal is said to have taken place on 19-10-92 at village Daraila. The case of the prosecution is that at about 12.30 p.m. the victim, minor Sangita, was playing with her younger brother aged about one year near her house. The Ata Chakki belonging to the father of the appellant is located just behind the house of the victim. While playing with her, her younger brother went towards the Ata Chakki of the appellant and Sangita followed him. The appellant who was alone in his Ata Chakki caughthold of Sangita and committed rape on her. After the incident Sangita came to her house and reported the matter to the members of the family who were present there including her mother PW 3 and her grandmother PW 4. Since the father of the victim girl as well as her grandfather were not at home at that time, they waited for them to arrive. The father of Sangita, who is also the informant in this case, Nathuni Prasad Kalwar, PW 7, came home about 3 p.m. when the incident was reported to him. As a result of the injuries caused on the private parts of the minor girl her pant and frock were stained with blood. The informant took her to the Police Station and also carried with him the blood-soaked pant and frock of the victim girl and lodged a report at the Police Station. It appears from the F.I.R. that the first information was lodged at 18.15 hours on the date of occurrence.

(3.) In the report lodged before the Officer-in-Charge of Guthani Police Station it was stated by the informant that when he reached home on that day at about 3 p.m. his minor daughter Sangita Kumari aged about 9 years, reported to him crying that at about 12.30 p.m. she was playing with her younger brother Santosh just behind their shop. While playing Santosh went to the Ata Chakki shop of the appellant who is son of Samsuddin Ahmad. To bring her bother back Sangita went inside the Ata Chakki but the appellant caught hold of her and removed her pant. When Sangita tried to raise an alarm he pressed her mouth with his hands and fell her on the ground and thereafter committed the rape. When Sangita started writhing in pain and blood started coming out of her private parts, the appellant wiped the blood with her pant and sent her back threatening that she should not say anything to anyone. The informant was told by Sangita that at that time there was no one else in the Ata Chakki and finding her alone the appellant had committed rape. She also told him that she came home crying and reported the matter to her mother and others. The informant has then stated that he was submitting a written report and was also producing the bloodstained pant and frock of his daughter. There was some delay in reporting the matter because no male member of the family was present in his house when the incident was reported.