Case Facts:
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.7849 of 2012 (2) dt.25-04-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.7849 of 2012 ====================================================== Arun Prasad@Arun Kumar Singh .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance: For the Petitioner : Mr. Sita Ram Singh, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Sharda Kumari, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 2 25-04-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State on the point of admission and, in my view, this petition can be disposed off on admission stage itself. Petitioner was made accused for the offence under [STATUTE] on the allegation that he used to sexually exploit the informant and also used to commit rape with other girls of the hostel of the informant and admittedly, at the relevant time, petitioner was working as Principal Bhagwan Budha High School, Bihar, Nalanda. It would appear from annexure 2 that the police after investigation submitted charge sheet under [STATUTE] but learned Chief Judicial Magistrate differed with the findings of the police and took cognizance for the offence under [STATUTE] . The case was committed to the court of sessions in usual way and a petition under section 228 of the Cr.P.C was filed before the Sessions court stating therein that no case under [STATUTE] is made out. The Sessions court rejected the above stated petition passing the order dated 27.1.2012 which has been challenged by the petitioner before this Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.7849 of 2012 (2) dt.25-04-2012 court filing petition under section 482 of the Cr.P.C. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that not a single witness has supported the statement of the victim girl in course of investigation and victim has only stated that she was sexually exploited and, therefore, at best, it is a case of [STATUTE] and no case under [STATUTE] is made out but I am not at all convinced with the above stated submissions because victim has specifically stated in her statement that she was sexually exploited by the petitioner and medical report also corroborates the statement of the victim girl. It is well settled principle of law that in rape case, the statement of the victim girl does not require corroboration and the statement of the victim girl is sufficient, and if the same inspires confidence to the court, the court may convict the accused only on the basis of solitary statement of the victim of rape. So far framing of charge is concerned, it is also well settled principle of law that charge can be framed even on the basis of strong suspicion. On the basis of the aforesaid discussions, I do not find any merit in this petition and accordingly, this petition stands dismissed on admission stage itself. Let this order be communicated to learned Addl. Sessions Judge, II, Nalanda in connection with Sessions trial no. 426/2011. Shahid/- (Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 354

Statute Text:
Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code. Assault or use of criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty. Whoever assaults or uses criminal force to any woman, intending to outrage or knowing it to be likely that he will there by outrage her modesty, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than one year but which may extend to five years, and shall also be liable to fine.