LAL MARANDI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 23rd May 1991, passed by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Dumka in Sessions Case No. 410 of 1990, whereby and whereunder, the learned Sessions Judge held the appellant guilty for the offence under Sections 376 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code and has sentenced him to undergo R.l. for a period of 7 years under both the counts for the said offence, However, the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) The case of the prosecution in short is that Sriful Hansda (PW-2) the wife of Churka Marandi (PW-3) lodged a written report before the police alleging therein that on 15-4-1990 she was at the house of Barka Marandi (PW-6) for taking Pochai drink. In the meantime the appellant Lal Marandi of the same village came there, caught hold of her and, thereafter, dragged her towards the Jungle with a view to commit rape on her. She wanted to raise alarm but the appellant gagged her mouth by putting cloth and, therefore, she could not raise any alarm. Thereafter, the appellant pulled the informant down and then committed rape on the point of dagger. After satisfying his sexual hunger he left her loose. Thereafter the informant came to her residence, narrated the story to her husband and then the matter was reported to the village Pradhan, who decided to hold Panchayati but no Panchayati could be held as the appellant did not attend the Panchayati. Thereafter, the matter was reported to the police.

(3.) In order to establish the charges, altogether 8 witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution, out of thern PW-6 Barka Marandi and PW-7 Naiki Marandi, wife of Barka Marandi, were declared hostile. PW-1 Chhutar Marandi in his evidence has stated that Churka Marandi and his wife Sriful Hansda came to her house and narrated the story of rape committed by the appellant Lal Marandi. He is not an eyewitness to the occurrence but he has stated whatever was told to him by the informant and her husband. PW-2 is Sriful Hansda, i.e. the prosecutrix herself. In her examination-in-chief she has stated that she had gone to the house of Barka Marandi to take meal. She stated as under:-