VISHNUDEO NARAYAN, J. - (1.) THIS appeal has been directed by the sole appellant named above against the judgment and order dated 27.4.1996 passed in ST No. 403 of 1993 by Sri R.P. Pathak. Sessions Judge, Giridih whereby the appellant was found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 376, IPC and he was convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/ -to be paid to the prosecutrix, ie., the informant, and in default thereof to further undergo R.I. for one year.
(2.) THE prosecution case has arisen on the basis of the written report of PW 1, the informant, lodged before the S.P. Giridih on 31.3.1993 regarding the occurrence which is said to have taken place on 27.3.1993 at 7.00 Oclock in the morning in village Khurd Magha, P.S. Jamua, District Giridih and the FIR in respect thereof was instituted on 13.4.1993 when it was received in the Jamua P.S. The allegation is that the appellant has ravished PW 1 the informant. The prosecution case, in brief, is that PW 1, the Informant had gone for natures call at 7.00 Oclock in the morning oh 27.3.1993 in a field west of her house and when she was to sit for easing, the appellant came there and he caught her and pressed her breast and kissed her and attempted to fell her on the ground. It is alleged that the informant attempted to raise alarms but the appellant closed her mouth and pressed her neck and felled her on the ground and thereafter making her helpless broke the rope of her Salwar and ravished her. It is also alleged that in course of the ravishment she was protesting but the appellant had stuffed her mouth. It is also alleged that the Jompher, Salwar and Orhni of the informant was smeared with mud in course of the occurrence. The prosecution case further is that after her ravishment the appellant intimidated her not to tell this fact to anybody failing which she will be done to death and the appellant thereafter fled away. It is also alleged that the informant was returning to her house weeping and in the way she met the father of the appellant and on query she told him about her ravishment by the appellant and she has also narrated the incident to several other persons who had assembled there and Anjuman was informed of the occurrence and on enquiry the Anjuman found the occurrence true but no action was taken by the Anjuman and she was riot allowed to go to the P.S. and she was also intimidated. It is also alleged that the husband of the informant works as a tailor and on getting information of the occurrence he had refused to keep the informant with him for leading conjugal life.
(3.) THE appellant has pleaded not guilty to the charge levelled against him and he claims himself to be innocent and to have committed no offence and that he has been falsely implicated in this case due to enmity at the instance of PW 3, Afjal and PW 4, Md. Akhtar. It has also been contended that no occurrence at all, as alleged, has ever taken place.;