JITRAM ORAON Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY Court. The appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment and sentence dated 29.9.2000 in Session Trial No. 321 of 1996/24 of 1996 by Additional Judicial Commissioner, Lohardaga whereby and whereunder both the appellants stand convicted under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/ - each and in default of payment of fine to serve R.I. for one year.

(2.) BRIEF facts leading to this appeal are that the victim P.W. 1 has gone to see Jatra Mela in the evening of 18th September 1995 with her minor nephew. Further stated that when she was returning after 7 p.m. from Mela both the appellants co -villagers followed her, when she reached at a lonely place near Nari Pulia she was caught hold by both of them and they asked he to satisfy their sexual lust. When she objected, her nephew was taken away by appellant Lakhan Oraon while other appellant Jitram Oraon forcibly committed intercourse with her. Further stated Lakhan Oraon came back and he also committed rape on her. According to victim, both of them committed rape on her twice and thereafter fled away leaving a new green bicycle at the spot. The victim did not venture to go to her house and remain for whole night there, in the. morning she went to her Fufa Somra Oraon of village Kisko and narrated the entire story, thereafter her Fufa called her father with whom they went to Kisko Police Station where her statement was recorded in the afternoon of 19th September, 1995.

(3.) THE present appeal has been preferred on the grounds that the trial court has committed mistake on records and in law. It is further submitted that the appellants have remained in custody for nearly fourteen months during trial and for more than two years nine months after conviction. It is further submitted that the prosecution story is not probable. According to the learned counsel for the appellants, the prosecution story suffers from improbability. Learned counsel stressed before me that in case, the victim was forcibly raped by two persons twice against her will, there must be some injury on her body or private part which is belied from the medical reports. It is also submitted that the victim was above twenty years and habituated to sexual intercourse. It is further submitted that no corroborative evidence is available in this case. According to learned counsel, when the trial court found the statement of the victim not corroborated from circumstances, it should have believed the defence version that they were falsely implicated. It was also stressed that although police has ceased the cloths worn by the victim, no forensic report is available on the record to support the prosecution case. The learned counsel further pointed out that there was inordinate delay in lodging the FIR, the victim was resident of Sarna Toli situated only 500 meters from the police station. It is further pointed out that the seized cycle from the place of occurrence makes the whole story improbable; therefore the appellants may be acquitted of the charges.