GUDU YADAV @ PAWAN YADAV SON OF LATE GOVIND YADAV Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND
LAWS(JHAR)-2018-12-103
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on December 21,2018

Gudu Yadav @ Pawan Yadav Son Of Late Govind Yadav Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF JHARKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Sujit Narayan Prasad, J. - (1.) It has been informed to this Court that M/S Bhaiya Sumeet Sahay and Smita Gaurav are no more in practice before this Court and therefore this Court has requested Mr. Bibhas Sinha to assist the Court and accordingly he has been appointed as amicus curiae. The paper book has been furnished to him to go through it for proper assistance to the Court. Mr. Bibhas Sinha after going through the paper book has argued the matter on merits.
(2.) The instant appeal is against the judgment of conviction dated 30.04.2010 and order of sentence dated 05.05.2010 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, FTC-VII, Giridih Gawan P.S. Case No.0001 of 2008 dated 05.01.2008, corresponding to Sessions Trial No.364 of 2008 (T.R. No.267 of 2008), registered for the offence under Sections 376(2)(G)/323/34 of Indian Penal Code, whereby and whereunder the sole appellant has been convicted for the offence under Sections 450, 323 and 376 (2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and a fine of Rs.3000/- for commission of offence under Section 450 of Indian Penal Code and simple imprisonment for six months for commission of offence under Section 323 of Indian Penal Code and rigorous imprisonment of ten years for the offence under Section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code, in default of payment of fine, is directed to undergo simple imprisonment for one year, all the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
(3.) The prosecution story in brief as per the FIR registered on 05.01.2008 is that, in the night of 04.01.2008, Sunita Kumari-informant while sleeping in her house along with her mother, father, sister and brother at about 11:30 p.m., some sound has been given by a man for opening the door and started beating the door for opening it, when the door was not opened, they have broken the door. At that time, there was light from lalten, on this light three persons have been seen, upon which, face of one person was seen whose name was Doman Sao, who has been identified and face of two persons was covered and as such they could not have been recognized. Thereafter, all the three persons have caught hold of the mother and father of the informant and taken them out from their house and started assaulted them from fists. Thereafter, the informant and her sister have been taken out from the house but somehow her sister has fled away but they have caught hold of the informant and taken her in the east side of the house and near well. They have fallen her down and then Doman Sao has committed rape. At that time, two persons have caught hold of her face and when she has tried to flee away, they have not let her and again both the persons have committed rape and also assaulted and threatened her that if she will make noise, she will be assaulted her with knife. All the three persons have closed her mouth with handkerchief and by her hand and started dropping in the well by saying that if she will make any noise she will be dropped in well and thereafter leaving near her house have fled away, then she has disclosed the occurrence to her mother and father, then it was reported to the Police.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.