DAN BAG Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has preferred these appeals against the Judgment of Conviction dtd. 23/12/2016 and Order of Sentence dtd. 2/1/2017 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Court, Jamshedpur in Sessions Trial No. 73 of 2014, whereby the appellant has been held guilty and convicted for the offence punishable under Sec. 376 of Indian Penal Code and Ss. 4 and 8 of POCSO Act and he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and a fine of Rs.5,000.00 for the offence under Sec. 8 of POCSO Act and rigorous imprisonment for ten years and a fine of Rs.10,000.00 for the offence under Sec. 4 of POCSO Act. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) Mr. Aushutosh Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that there is eight days in lodging the FIR without any explanation. He further submits that it has been come in the evidence that the relationship between the appellant and the family members of the victim was cordial. He argues that since the doctor has found no injury on the private part of the girl, therefore oral evidence regarding rape is not substantiated.

(3.) Learned counsel for the State has defended the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence and submitted that in the FIR, the mother has categorically stated that she had seen the incident and she had supported the same as PW3. He further contends that though the doctor has stated that he has not found the injury on the body of the victim but from his report, it will be clear that some injury was found in the genital of the girl.