- (1.) This is an application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, filed by the petitioner Saktipada Pahari, seeking to quash the proceeding before the Ld. Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Contai, as well as First Information Report of Contai Police Station Case No. 98/99 dated 10.6.99 under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (being G.R. Case No. 413 of 1999). The facts leading to the present revisional application may be summarized as follows : That 10.5.99 one Satyabrata Pahari filed an application under section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code before the S.D.J.M., Contai, alleging, Inter alia, that on 6.5.99 his minor daughter Kabita Pahari aged about 9 years went to the house of the petitoner to see T.V. and at the time the present petitioner Saktipada Pahari was alone in his house. It was also alleged in the application that the present petitioner forcibly raped his minor daughter for which Kabita Pahari sustained injuries in her private parts and for which she had been admitted to the hospital at Contai where she was treated by the doctors. It was also alleged in the petition of complaint that the incident in question was narrated by the de facto complainant as also by his minor daughter to the witnesses and the under- garments of the victim have been washed away by water at the hospital. It was further alleged in the petition of complaint that about one and a half years back, the present petitioner also raped the minor daughter of the defacto complainant and the aforesaid incident being narrated to the villagers, there had been a village salish over the issue and at the salish the present petitioner assured the villagers that recurrence of such incident would never happen.
(2.) The aforesaid application under section 156(3) being forwarded to the Police, Police took cognizance and started Contai P.S. Case No. 98/99 dated 10.6.97 under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.
(3.) It was contended by the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case out of enmity regarding the land with his next door neighbour, the defacto complainant of this case. It was also contended on behalf of the petitioner that some time back, the defacto complainant made also similar attempt to involve the present petitioner in a case under section 376 of I.P.C. alleging commission of rape on his minor daughter, Kabita and over this issue there has been a village salish and in the salish, after taking statements of the concerned persons the persons present in the salish came to the opinion that there has been no proof of rape and as such the present petitioner was set free by them. It was also alleged by the petitioner that if really there was any occurrence which took place some two or three years back, then why the defacto complainant again sent his daugher to the petitioner's house to see T.V. It was further alleged by the petitioner that as per the allegation of the defacto complainant, the occurrence took place on 6.5.99 at about 12 noon in the house of the present petitioner and his daughter was allegedly bleeding after the incident and Inspite of that she was not admitted to the hospital on that day nor she was examined on the same day by any doctor and she was only produced before the Medical Officer on 15.6.99. It was also found by the Medical Officer that there was no injury and also there was also no possibility of intercourse as alleged.;