VIKRAM PASWAN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE solitary appellant was tried by the learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court II, Gaya by being charged under sections 366(A) and 376 IPC in S.T. No. 110 of 2006. By judgment dated 7.2.2008 the learned trial judge found the appellant guilty of committing the offences and after hearing him on 8.2.2008 under section 235 Cr.P.C. directed him to suffer RI for ten years under each of the two counts. THE sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) LALITA Devi (P.W. 9) lodged a written report (Ext. 1) with the police alleging that this appellant had enticed her daughter Pinki Kumari (P.W. 10) away along with her son Ankush Kumar for subjecting her to illicit intercourse. The written report (Ext.1) was scribed by Kailash Prasad, who was the Mukhia of the Grampanchayat, on the basis of which FIR was drawn up and investigation was taken up by SI Jai Prakash, who recovered the lady and sent her to a doctor for medical examination and the report (Ext. 4) was obtained. P.W. 10 was also produced before a magistrate for recording her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. and this is how statement of the victim was recorded. Finding materials sufficient, the appellant was sent up for trial, which ended in the impugned judgment.

(3.) THE learned judge has referred to a Supreme Court decision to say that even if there was no clinical damage to the private part of the lady, it could still be a case under section 376 IPC. THE doctor has not been examined and the report was categorically stating that no sign of rape was found by the doctor as per the document (Ext. 4). If the doctor was not examined, opinion which was contained or expressed in Ext. 4 could not be considered to make out a case which was never available from the attending circumstances of the case.