VISHNUDEO NARAYAN, J. - (1.) THIS appeal has been preferred by the sole appellant named above against the impugned judgment and order dated 30.6.1990 passed in Sessions Case No. 326/138 of 1986/1989 by Shri Sheo Dayal Prasad, Additional Sessions Judge, Pakur whereby and whereunder the appellant was found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and he was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years.
(2.) THE prosecution case has arisen on the basis of the Fardbeyan (Ext. 1) of P.W. 1, Chunia Keotin, the informant and the alleged victim of this case recorded by S.I., R.K. Sinha of Litipara P. S. on 1.1.1986 at 16.30 hours at village Badasarsa regarding the occurrence which is said to have taken place at about 12 o 'clock in the day on 27.12.1985 in the field near a pond situate in village Fulpahari, P.S. ''Litipara, District -Sahibganj and the case was instituted by drawing formal F.I. R. on that very day at 20.30 hours and the Fardbeyan and F.I.R. have been received in the Court empowered to take cognizance on 8.1.1986. According to the prosecution case, P.W. 1, Chunia Keotin, the informant had gone to take bath in the pond in village Fulpahari on Friday i.e. 27.12.1985 and she was returning to her house from the pond at about 12 o 'clock in the day and appellant Dindayal Kewat met her in the way and finding her alone caught her hand and dragged her inside a bush and felled her on the ground and ravished her. It is alleged that she started crying and P.W. 6, Babudhan Hansda and one Sakal Hembram, son of Budhroy Hansda came there from the "Khalian" and the appellant fled away from there seeing them. It is also alleged that the informant came to her house and narrated the incident to her parents i.e. P.W. 2 and P.W. 3 and other covillagers and the matter was reported to the Village Pradhan for Panchayati but the appellant and his father did not abide by the verdict of the Panchayat and thereafter the Village Pradhan and Sarpanch asked the informant to get a case instituted in the police station.
(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 he has been falsely implicated in this case. It has been contended that this appellant is the caste man of the informant and he is possessed of twelve bighas of agricultural land and the parent of the informant had a desire to get the marriage of the informant performed with the appellant and on his refusal, he has been falsely dragged in this case to put pressure on him.;