- (1.) THIS appeal at the instance of the appellant has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 23.2.1999 and 26.2.1999 passed in Sessions Case No. 46 of 1997 by Shri Amitav Kumar Gupta, 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Dumka 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 R.I. for five years.
(2.) THE prosecution case has arisen on the basis of the written report lodged before Sikaripara Police Station, District Dumka on 13.3.1997 (Ext. 1) at 9.30 hours by P.W. 7 Leel Muni Soren aged about more than 45 years the informant and said to be the victim of alleged ravishment regarding the occurrence which is said to have taken place on 10.3.1997 at 19.00 hours in a bush by the side of the village road at Sima Pahar Aamchuan half kilometer away from village Pahar Aamchua within Sikaripara P.S. District Dumka. On the basis of the written report aforesaid the case was instituted against the appellant by drawing of a formal F.I.R. (Ext.3) on that very day at 9.30 hours and the said written report and the formal F.I.R. were received on 14.3.1997 in the court empowered to take cognizance. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant was returning to her village Pahar Aamchua at 1.9.00 hours on 10.3.1997 from Sarasdangol Hatia and the appellant was also returning to the said village and he was behind her and when she reached near Sima Pahar Aamchua the appellant caught and overpowered her and dragged her inside the bush nearby the said road and when she attempted to raise alarms she was slapped and intimidated. It is also alleged that inspite of that she has raised alarms twice but she was assaulted. It has further been alleged that, thereafter, the appellant felled her and ravished her forcibly. It is also alleged that she was carrying oil, vegetables and fried rice from the said market with her and she has lost those articles in the said occurrence. The prosecution case further is that, thereafter, I she returned to her house and narrated the incident to P.W. 6, Ramu Baski, her husband, P.W.2 Shibu Baski and P.W.5 Johan Baski besides Jai Baski and Pramanik.
(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 go up case by the informant at the instance of P.W.1 Raska Baksi, the brother of the village Pradhan as there is enmity between him on the one hand and the informant as well as P.W. 1 on the other hand in respect of pond and land of Karam Baski respectively.;