BALARAM JENA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the State. The Judgment and Order of conviction dated 26.1.1996 passed by the learned Asst.Sessions Judge, Anandapur convicting the appellants under Section 376(2)(g) of Indian Penal Code and sentencing each of them to undergo R.I. for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/ -, in default to undergo R.I. for one year more in S.T. No.3/91 of 1996 -95 is impugned in this Criminal Appeal. The short facts of the prosecution case is that the victim girl Menja Ho (p.w.6), daughter of Dumuku Ho, p.w.7 resident of Village Saradiba in the District of Mayurbhanj had gone to visit some of her relatives staying in Village Bidyadharpur in the District of Keonjhar on the occasion of 'Pana Sankranti on 14.4.1995. On the said date at about 1 p.m. she had been to river Salandi to take her bath. While returning from the river, the accused persons forcefully dragged her to a nearby bush, undressed her and committed sexual assault one after the other by gagging her mouth. Her relative, to whose house, she had gone to visit noticing her absence, searched for her and arrived near the bush. Seeing them the accused persons ran away from the place of occurrence. Thereafter, the victim was taken to the house of her uncle, p.w.2, where she narrated the entire incident before some of the witnesses. To pacify the matter, a village meeting was convened, but the accused persons did not attend the said meeting and no amicable settlement could be arrived at. Ultimately, p.w.1 lodged the F.I.R. at Soro Police Station, which was reduced to writing and investigation commenced. After completion of the investigation, charge sheet was submitted and the accused -appellants faced, the charge in G.R. Case No.122 of 1995. After commitment, the case was tried by the learned Asst. Sessions Judge, Anandapur in S.T. No.3/91 of 1996 -95. To prove the case, prosecution examined as many as twelve witnesses, out of whom p.w.6 was the victim girl, p.w.1 was the informant, p.w.3 was the wife of p.w.2, p.w.4 was the wife of p.w.1, p.w.7 was the father of the victim, p.ws. 5 and 6 were the villagers who turned hostile, p.w.8 was a formal witness, pws.9 and 10 were the seizure witnesses, p.w.11 was the Investigating Officer and p.w.12 was the Medical Officer, who examined the victim girl. The prosecution also exhibited as many as eleven documents, out of which Ext.1 was the F.I.R., Ext.9 was the Chemical Examination Report, Ext.7 was the Medical Examination Report, Ext.10 report of the Radiologist, Ext.6 was another Medical Report and Ext. 11 was the T.I. Parade report. The learned trial Court after discussion of the evidence both oral and documentary arrived at a conclusion that the charge levelled against the accused persons was made out and found them guilty of the offence under Section 376(2)(g) of Indian Penal Code and convicted them thereunder. Learned counsel for the appellants forcefully submitted that the Court below has not properly appreciated the oral evidence and the conclusions arrived at by him were on the basis of surmises and conjunctures. According to learned counsel for the appellants, the T.I. Parade was not conducted in proper way and the Court below without appreciating the facts and circumstances illegally convicted the accused -appellants and it is a fit case, where the order of conviction and sentence should be set aside. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand submitted that the Court below has carefully scrutinized the evidence, both oral and documentary, and basing upon the medical report, the Medical Certificate and other documents as well as the oral evidence of the prosecutrix has rightly arrived at a conclusion that the appellants committed the alleged crime and the order of conviction and sentence is in consonance with the law and needs no interference. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that as a matter of fact, all the appellants have already undergone the imprisonment sentenced by the Court below and thus, virtually this Crl. Appeal has become infructuous. After hearing learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the state, being the final Courts of facts, I thought it just and proper to once again scrutinize the evidence. Pw.6 the victim girl has narrated the entire story as to how she was forcefully carried away from the bank of river Salandi, gagged by the appellants and subjected to threat and ravished. The statements made by the victim in Court are very cogent and inspire confidence. Though she was cross -examined at length, nothing much could be elicited from her to dislodge her statements. The Medical Report clearly reveals that the victim girl is a tribal only of 14 years. She was a stranger to the place and the accused persons brutally committed sexual assault on her. This fact gets corroborated from the Medical Certificate as well as the evidence of the Doctor, who opined that the victim was subjected to sexual intercourse. Added to the said evidence, the victim also identified the accused persons in the T.I. Parade. The evidence of other witnesses also corroborated the statement made by the victim. After going through the evidence of p.w. 1,2,3,4,6 and 7 as well as the evidence of p.ws. 11 and 12 and after perusing the other materials available, I find that the Court below has not committed any error and the findings arrived at are just and proper and in consonance with the evidence available on record. Law is well settled that conviction under Section 376(2)(g) of Indian Penal Code can be maintained, if the statements made by the victim draw confidence. In view of the aforesaid settled position of law, I do not find any error or lacuna in the judgment of the trial Court and I do not feel called upon to interfere with the order of conviction and sentence. Accordingly, this Criminal Appeal stands dismissed. Appeal dismissed.