JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) This appeal is directed
against the judgment dated 23rd May 1991,
passed by the 4th Additional Sessions
Judge, Dumka in Sessions Case No. 410 of
1990, whereby and whereunder, the learned
Sessions Judge held the appellant guilty for
the offence under Sections 376 and 366 of
the Indian Penal Code and has sentenced
him to undergo R.l. for a period of 7 years
under both the counts for the said offence,
However, the sentences were directed to run
concurrently.
(2.) The case of the prosecution in short
is that Sriful Hansda (PW-2) the wife of
Churka Marandi (PW-3) lodged a written
report before the police alleging therein that
on 15-4-1990 she was at the house of Barka
Marandi (PW-6) for taking Pochai drink. In
the meantime the appellant Lal Marandi of
the same village came there, caught hold of
her and, thereafter, dragged her towards the
Jungle with a view to commit rape on her.
She wanted to raise alarm but the appellant
gagged her mouth by putting cloth and,
therefore, she could not raise any alarm.
Thereafter, the appellant pulled the informant down and then committed rape on the
point of dagger. After satisfying his sexual
hunger he left her loose. Thereafter the informant
came to her residence, narrated the
story to her husband and then the matter
was reported to the village Pradhan, who
decided to hold Panchayati but no
Panchayati could be held as the appellant
did not attend the Panchayati. Thereafter,
the matter was reported to the police.
(3.) In order to establish the charges, altogether 8
witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution, out of thern PW-6
Barka Marandi and PW-7 Naiki Marandi,
wife of Barka Marandi, were declared hostile.
PW-1 Chhutar Marandi in his evidence
has stated that Churka Marandi and his wife
Sriful Hansda came to her house and narrated
the story of rape committed by the
appellant Lal Marandi. He is not an eyewitness to
the occurrence but he has stated
whatever was told to him by the informant
and her husband.
PW-2 is Sriful Hansda, i.e. the prosecutrix herself.
In her examination-in-chief she
has stated that she had gone to the house
of Barka Marandi to take meal. She stated
as under:-
"Main Barka ke Ghar khana khane ke liye
gayee thi kyonki uska kaam ki thi."
In her cross-examination in Paragraph-3
she has stated that when she tried to raise
alarm, but her mouth was gagged. She has
further stated that the wife of Barka Marandi
was present at that time but she did not do
any thing. She has further stated in Paragraph-4
of her evidence that when she was
thrown on the ground, her blouse was torn
but she did not receive any injury on her
person and the appellant kept her in the Jungle for about 3 hours.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.