RAMESH LIYANGI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 22nd April, 2000 passed by the Sessions Judge, Chaibasa in S.T. No. 95 of 1999 whereby and whereunder the appellant, Ramesh Liyangi has been convicted for the offence under Sec. 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years.

(2.) THE prosecution story as it stands recorded in the written report (Ext. 2) of the prosecutrix, Sarojini Sundi (PW 1) was that on 30.9.1998 at about 8 p.m. when she retired to her bed after closing the door of the house, soon thereafter her neighbour, appellant, Ramesh Liyangi came out from under the cot having dagger in his hand and committed rape on the cot itself after terrorizing her. In the meantime, her brother, Manoranjan Sundi (PW 4) came and asked her to open the door. On his command when she opened the door, the appellant started running away from the room to which her brother raised alarm and the neighbouring people assembled there and caught hold the appellant. The elder brother of the appellant, Bangali Liyangl also appeared who Inflicted fist to the appellant Ramesh and taking advantage of the situation, he fled away and hid himself somewhere but who could not be located on search. On the alleged date of the occurrence her father was away working at Joda and only on his return from posting written report was presented. Pant and shirt left over by the appellant in the house of the prosecutrix was handed over at the police station. She further narrated that on her alarm the villagers namely Kundan Sundi (PW 6) and Brajil Sundi appeared at the scene and learnt about the occurrence. On the written report Chaibasa (Muffasil) P.S. Case No. 95 of 1998 was registered on 8.10.1998 for the alleged occurrence dated 30.9.1998 for the offence under Sec. 376 of the Indian Penal Code against the sole appellant.

(3.) MR . Jawahar Prasad, the learned APP fairly conceded that no offence under Sec. 376 of the Indian Penal Code is made out against the appellant though there is circumstance appearing against the appellant that he was found in the room of the prosecutrix, Sarojni Sundi. Admittedly, there was no eye -witness of the alleged charge under Sec. 376 of the Indian Penal Code.