KAILASH BIHARI YADAV Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant, namely, Kailash Bihari Yadav, being aggrieved and dissatisfied of the judgment and order dated 21.01.2003 passed in Sessions Case No. 52 of 2000 by learned Sri Anirudh Prasad Sharma, 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Dumka whereby and whereunder the learned Trial Court has not held guilty the appellant under Section 376 read with 511 of the I.P.C but held guilty under Section 323 and 448 of the I.P.C and further directed to go R.I for four months each under Section 323 and 448 of the I.P.C and both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) The case of the prosecution, as folded in the fardbeyan given by Pramila Yadav on 09.11.1997 alleging that on 08.11.1997 at 4 P.M, the appellant who was divorced husband of the informant entered into the house of the informant and abused her, whereupon the informant retorted thereupon the accused caught hold of informant and assaulted her and fell down on the ground and tried to commit rape upon her. It was further alleged that elder sister of informant namely, Shyama Devi Yadav who was working in Jama Primary Health Centre also resisted then the appellantaccused abused her and snatched Rs. 500/ from her purse.

(3.) On the basis of these allegations, Dumka(Town) P.S. Case No. 169 of 1997 was registered on 09.11.1997 under Sections 448, 341, 323, 379, 376 and 511 of the I.P.C. After investigation police submitted chargesheet on 31.12.1997 under Sections 448, 341, 323 and 504 of the I.P.C., thereafter charges were framed on 12.12.2000 by the learned 1st Assistant Sessions Judge, Dumka against the appellant under Sections 323, 448, 376 and 511 of the I.P.C and the prosecution in support of his case examined six witnesses. Thereafter, learned Trial Court held the appellant not guilty for the offence under Sections 376 and 511 of the I.P.C and held guilty under Sections 323 and 448 of the I.P.C and directed to undergo R.I for four months each and both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.