SAKILA KHATOON Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Criminal Revision is directed against the order passed by Shri D.K. Singh, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hazaribagh on 5.2.2005 in Complaint Case No. 1032 of 2004 corresponding to T.R. No. 1156 of 2005, whereby and whereunder, the opposite party No. 2 Lakhendra Thakur was discharged for the alleged offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code under Section 203, Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) BRIEF fact of the case, as stands narrated in the statement of the petitioner Sakila Khatoon before the Keredari police, was that she was the Chairperson of Mahila Mandal Vikas Manch, Prakhand Keredari. On 16.6.2004 at about 8.00 a.m. she proceeded with the opposite party No. 2 Lakhendra Thakur, Accountant of the said organization, aged about 35 years and boarded the bus. She along with the opposite party No. 2 alighted from the bus at village Kodway and from there she went to village Deshwari with him on foot. In the said village she had to contact a female member, but when failed to meet her, she along with the opposite party No. 2 proceeded towards Patra on foot. It was alleged that when they reached near the Deshwari forest, the opposite party No. 2 Lakhendra Thakur took out a dagger from his possession, threatened her to keep quiet and forcibly committed rape after removing her garments by the side of the bush. She further alleged that opposite party No. 2 threatened to kill her after commission of rape in case of disclosure of the occurrence to any one and that he promised to maintain throughout her life if she would keep mum. Because of such threatening the prosecutrix explained that she could not narrate the occurrence to any one but when she could not control the trauma, she narrated the occurrence to her mother Most. Hafizam Khatoon on 23.6.2004 and pursuant to that she was taken to Keredari police station where her statement was recorded and she put her signature on the statement in presence of her mother Most. Hafizam Khatoon. On the basis of such statement, Keredari P.S. Case No. 22 of 2004 for the offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code against the opposite party No. 2 was drawn, but after investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted final form exonerating the opposite party No. 2 from the charge under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code as levelled by the petitioner herein. Pursuant to that, petitioner filed a protest petition before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribhag on 29.11.2004, which was treated as Complaint Case No. 1032 of 2004. Inquiry was conducted and witness on behalf of the complainant -petitioner was examined under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Judicial Magistrate dismissed the complaint petition of the petitioner under Section 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(3.) FINALLY , it has been submitted that the complaint petition of the petitioner was dismissed as also on the basis of injury report as no injury was found in the private parts of the prosecutrix and similarly, no sign of rape was found on her person. The learned Counsel exhorted that the Judicial Magistrate erroneously observed that delay of eight days' in lodging the FIR was not explained and the alleged rape could not be supported in the injury report.