SUBHASH MANDAL Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant, namely, Subhash Mandal, being aggrieved and dissatisfied of the judgment and order dated 24.12.2002 passed in Sessions Case No. 241 of 2001 by Sri M.P Mandal, Additional Sessions Judge1, Rajmahal whereby and whereunder the appellant, namely, Subhash Mandal was convicted under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and was ordered to go rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/ further he was also ordered to undergo imprisonment for two months for the offence under Section 342 of the I.P.C and both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently and in default of fine, the appellant was ordered to go imprisonment for six months

(2.) The case of the prosecution, as unfolded the fardbeyan of the prosecutrix recorded by Pankaj Kumar Jha OfficerInCharge, Radhanagar Police station on 07.09.2000 at 11.00 hrs. alleging that on 05.09.2000 (Tuesday) the prosecutrix along with her sister, Anjana Kumari had gone to the house of one Rajendra Mistri where some cultural programme were organised. In the midnight when the prosecutrix was returning after conclusion of cultural programme and reached near the Panchyat Bhavan and went to attend the call of nature, in the meanwhile Subhash Mandal, appellant came and caught hold her and threatened her of dire consequences and took her to Panchayat Bhavan thereafter committed rape upon her and threatened to dire consequences. It is alleged that the informant went to her house and disclosed this fact thereafter a panchyati was organized by the villagers and the appellant accepted his guilt and also accepted to marry with her, but on 06.09.2000 the appellant fled away from the house.

(3.) On the basis of these allegations, Rajmahal (Radhanagar) P Case No. 154 of 2000 dated 08.09.2000 was instituted under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and after investigation police submitted chargesheet on 09.12.2000 under Sections 341, 342, 376/34 of the I.P and further learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajmahal on 17.01.2002 framed charges under Sections 376/34 and 342 of the I.P Trial proceeded and during course of trial the prosecution examined altogether 14 witness, out of which P.Ws. 1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12 and 13 were declared hostile. P.W.6 is Doctor, P.W.4 is the prosecutrix herself, P.W.3 is sister of the prosecutrix. After conclusion of the trial the Trial Court held the appellant guilty under Section 376 of the I.P.C and directed to undergo R.I for five years and fine of Rs. 2,000/ and further held guilty under Section 342 and directed to go imprisonment for two months and both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently and in default of fine further go imprisonment for six months.