Ratnaker Bhengra, J. - (1.) These Criminal Appeals have been preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 3.10.2007 and 5.10.2007 respectively passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge,Chatra (FTC) in connection with Sessions Trial No. 139 of 2006 arising out of Simaria P.S. Case No. 25 of 2006 , G.R. no. 227 of 2006 whereby and whereunder appellants namely Basant Mistri and Mahendra Mistri were sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years u/s 498A IPC and a fine of Rs. 1000/ each and in default of fine further imprisonment for six months and u/s 5(1) of The Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 further R.I. for three years and fine of Rs. 1000/ each and to further undergo imprisonment for six months in default of payment of fine amount and both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Appellant China Mallik was sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years for offence u/s 344 IPC and a fine of Rs. 1,000/ and to further undergo imprisonment for six months in default of payment of fine. Further sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years for offence u/s 376 IPC and a fine of Rs. 2,000/ and to further undergo imprisonment for one years in default of fine and u/s 5 (I) of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 to further undergo imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 1,000/ and further undergo imprisonment for six months in default and all the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
(2.) The prosecution case according to the fard beyan of informant/victim (name concealed) PW 6 is that she was married to accused Mahendra Mistri of Village Jogiara, PS Pratappur, Dist. Chatra in the month of Jyeshth 2005 in accordance with the Hindu rites and her parents had given gifts to the best of their ability at the time of their marriage. She remained for 15/20 days with her husband in her nupital house. Her husband had been working in Kolkata since before. Hence, he left her at the her parent's place at Village Ranigunj, PS Imamgunj, Dist Gaya after about twenty days of marriage, saying that he is going to Kolkata for work and will return after working for some days then take her to his home, and thus her husband went to Kolkata. Thereafter, her husband returned from Kolkata in month of Shawan 2005 and without informing her he contracted another marriage with the daughter of Fagu Mistri of Village Angawan. When the parents of the informant came to know about another marriage by informant's husband then family members of her in law's in order to suppress this fact took informant to village Jogiara and kept her in the house of her uncle in law Phul Mistri. Thereafter about 15/20 days ago her husband Mahendra Mistri, his elder brother accused Basant Mistri and accused China Mallik came to the house of her uncle in law in village Jogiara and took her next day to village Ichchak where Mahendra and Basant used to live but they did not take her to their house rather took her to the house of accused China Mallik and left her there and went away. Accordingly, she remained in custody and confinement in the house of China Mallik for about 10 to 12 days. China Mallik confined her in his house under closed door and used to rape her every day and when she objected he threated to kill her. The villagers came to know about her confinement then they took her out from the house of China Mallik and informed the police. Police brought her, accused Basant Mistri and China Mallik to the police station for interrogation, but since she became mentally weak due to atrocities committed on her she could not tell true facts. Hence, she was left on written undertaking to live at the house of her husband's elder brother, Ratan Mistri. However, China Mallik was detained at the police station. She came to know later on that a warrant was pending against China Mallik so he was sent to jail. Her brothers came on 14.4.2006, then she was no longer fearful and made true statement regarding what had happened to her.
(3.) On the basis of fard beyan of the informant Simaria P.S. Case no. 25 of 2006 was registered and after investigation charge sheet was submitted under Sections 344/494/498/498A/376/371 IPC and u/s 5/6 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956. Thereafter, cognizance was taken and case was committed to the court of Sessions and registered as S.T. No. 139 of 2006. The charges were framed against the accused persons to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined altogether eight witnesses and on the conclusion of the trial the learned trial court convicted and sentenced the appellants as aforesaid.;