VISHNUDEO NARAYAN, J. - (1.) THIS appeal at the instance of the appellant stands directed against the impugned Judgment and order dated 10.8.1998, and 12.8.1998, respectively passed in Sessions Trial No. 239 of 1996 by Shri B.N.P. Singh. Sessions Judge, Palamau at Daltonganj 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 and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/ - and in default thereof further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.
(2.) THE prosecution case has arisen on the basis of the fardbeyan, (Ext. 2) of informant, PW 2 Sona Sati Devi said to be the victim of ravishment in this case recorded by Sub -Inspector B.D. Singh. O/C Nagar Utari Police Station at 15.00 hours on 2.4.1996, at Bangipur Block chowk road regarding the occurrence which is said to have taken place on 1.4,1996, at 21.00 hours in the Rahar field in village Kachuwan, Police Station -Nagar Utari, Dis -trict -Garhwa. The case was instituted by drawing of a formal first information report on 2.4.1996 at 16.00 hours which was received on 3.4.1996 in the Court empowered to take cognizance. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant PW 2 Sona Sati Devi had gone for nature 'scall in the Rahar field of one Hari Mistry, which is situated east of her house, at about 21.00 hours on 1.4.1996, and it was a moonlit night and she had found the appellant roaming on the ridge of the said Rahar field. It is alleged that the appellant entered in the said Rahar field caught her and felled her on the ground and when she raised alarms, the appellant stuffed her mouth by putting his gamcha and intimidated her to be done to death pointing a sixer - pistol at her taking out from his waist and out of fear she kept mum. The prosecution case further is that the appellant ravished her for ten minutes and after satisfying his lust, he stood up and removed the said gamcha from her mouth and fled away and thereafter she cried and raised alarms, and at this, her husband PW 1 Ashok Prajapati and his father, PW 6 Ram Briksh Prajapati came there and they were informed of the occur rence and they chased the appellant, who made good his escape. It is further alleged that there was a panchayati to be held in the village in respect thereof and due to that there has been some delay in coming to the police station for lodging the case.
(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 due to the demand of his wages from the husband of the informant for weaving carpet at his house.;