CHANDAN JADU HEMBRAM Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction dtd. 18/7/2007 and sentence dtd. 19/7/2007 passed by learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, FTC, Dumka in S.C. No.277 of 2004 whereby and whereunder, the sole appellant has been held guilty for the offence under Sec. 376 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. of 7 years with fine of Rs.2,000.00 with default stipulation.

(2.) Factual matrix giving rise to this appeal is based on the complaint petition being C.P. No.132 of 2004 filed on 2/4/2004 in the court of CJM, Dumka by the prosecutrix (complainant) stating inter alia that in the last month of Aghan on Tuesday at about 5:00 PM, while the prosecutrix (P.W.7) was going towards the house of Chandan Hembrom(appellant) in village-Murbhanga, meanwhile, Chandan Hembrom caught hold of her and dragged inside his dilapidated house and committed rape upon her by pressing her mouth. When the prosecutrix started weeping, the accused assured her to solemnize marriage with her. Thereafter, on false pretext of marriage, the accused Chandan Hembrom frequently committed rape with her taking her to Bangal in Gando Durga Puja Fair, Kushpahari Ras Fair, Balijore Fair, Palopisa Kadma Lakhi Puja Fair. It is further alleged that due to sexual intercourse, the prosecutrix (P.W.7) got conceived. Thereafter, she informed the accused about the pregnancy then the accused Chandan Hembrom along with Dular Hembrom and Shushilal Tudu tried to abort her pregnancy and also gave Rs.500.00 to her for abortion. It is further alleged that when the prosecutrix did not concede to the accused regarding abortion, then they started threatening to kill her and assaulted her. It is further alleged that when the prosecutrix was pregnant for 3-4 months, she informed her parents, thereafter, her parents and villagers made contact with all the accused persons and asked them to get the accused Chandan Hemobrom married with the prosecutrix but the other accused persons locked the accused Chandan Hembrom in the house and sent him somewhere, so that he could not attend the Panchayati. It is further alleged that the accused persons have misbehaved with the prosecutrix and her parents. The prosecutrix again went to the house of accused Chandan Hembrom with a proposal of marriage but other accused, Dular Hembrom and Shushilal Tudu assaulted the prosecutrix and dashed her away from the house. The sister of the accused, Dular Hembrom and his brother-in-law Sushilal Tudu were trying to solemnize marriage of the accused Chandan Hembrom with another girl.

(3.) On the basis of above information, the prosecutrix filed a complaint petition for the offences under Sec. 376, 420, 323, 201, 500 and 34 of IPC, which has been sent to Dumka (M) P.S. under Sec. 156(3) Cr.P.C for instituting the FIR. Accordingly, Dumka (M) P.S. Case No.41 of 2004 under the aforesaid Sec. was instituted and charge to investigation of the case was given to S.I. Sunil Kumar Singh. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the accused persons for the offence under Sec. 376, 417, 323, 504 and 34 of IPC. The case was committed to the court of Sessions where S.C. No.277 of 2004 was registered. The appellant has denied the charge levelled against him and claimed to be tried. After conclusion of trial, the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence has been passed, which has been assailed in this appeal.