SHANKAR PAUL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 5 -9 -2000 passed by Sri Madhusudan Singh, Additional Sessions Judge, Kishanganj in Sessions Trial No. 17 of 1999 whereby and whereunder he found and held the appellant guilty and convicted him under Sections 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the Code) and sentence him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years under the first count and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years under the second count.

(2.) It would be relevant and convenient to reproduce in brief the facts of the case. The victim Jhunna Das, a minor girl (P.W. 8) lived with her parents at Purani Khagra, Kishanganj. She was a student of Class X at Kanya Madhya Vidyalaya, Dumaria, Kishanganj. At about 6 a.m. on 4 -6 -1998 she left her house for the school. She did not return her home till late evening. The members of her family then got anxious and they started making search for her. Despite hectic search the victim girl Jhunna Das could not be traced out. One Abdul Noman used to teach her as tutor. On account of his indecent activities and icereputation the parents of the victim girl asked Abdul Noman to stop teaching her on tuition basis. As he was removed and disengaged he got infuriated and enraged. He threatened that he would take away the victim Jhunna Das. Hence, the inmates of the house including informant Malka Das, elder sister of the victim suspected that Abdul Noman enticed away her.

(3.) Informant Malika Das (P.W. 3) submitted a written report (Ext. 2) to the Officer -in -Charge of Kishanganj Police Station on the basis of which a formal First Information Report (Ext. 3) was drawn up and Kishanganj P.S. Case No. 142/98 was registered under Sections 363, 365 and 366 -A of the Code. Investigation was taken up by P.W. 7 Narendra Sharma, Sub -Inspector of Police. In course of investigation, Jhunna Das (P.W. 8) returned her home though P.W. 7 stated that the victim Jhunna Das was recovered from the house of the appellant, however, there is no material on record to substantiate the claim of P.W. 7 that he had recovered the victim girl and arrested the appellant from the house of the latter. The victim (P.W. 8) returned to her house, narrated how she was abducted by the appellant and taken away by him in a car while she had reached near the Court on way to her school. She also stated to her sister (P.W. 3), brother Subhash Kumar Das (P.W. 5) as well as the police that Abdul Noman, Alimuddin, Idris and Abdul Hafiz were also sitting in the car, referred to above although they got off from the car after it covered son distance and the appellant took the victim to Katihar where he ravished her on 4th and 5th June, 1998. After she was released and left by the appellant at Katihar Railway Station she returned to her house. Her statement was also recorded under Section 164 Cr. P.C., the narratives of which were identical to that disclosed to the members of her family as well as the police. The victim was examined by the Doctor (Mrs.) Tapti Dhar Rai (P.W. 6) who estimated her age to be about 16 years.