Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.547 of 2011 =========================================================== Rohan Yadav, son of Late Munshi Yadav, resident of village-Kanhaipur, P.S.- Mokama, District-Patna .... .... Appellant Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Respondent =========================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Arjun Prasad, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ajay Mishra, A.P.P. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 15-10-2012 Heard Mr. Arjun Prasad, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Ajay Mishra, learned A.P.P. for the State. The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 10.3.2011 and order dated 16.3.2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Barh (Patna) in Sessions Trial No. 684 of 2006 by which the trial court has convicted the appellant and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years under [STATUTE] and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the trial court has directed the appellant to further undergo imprisonment for six months. The prosecution story is based on the written report dated 29.8.2005 submitted at 11 a.m. by P.W. 5 Shanti Devi to the Officer-in-Charge, Mokama Police Station, alleging, inter alia, that on 28.8.2005 after completing her work in Rajendra Nagar, she returned by train and got down at about 9.30 p.m. at Kanhaipur Halt and proceeded towards her village. At this time, it is alleged that Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.547 of 2011 dt.15-10-2012 2 / 10 2 the appellant, a co-villager started to walk along with her and after following her for some distance, he caught her from behind, bodily lifted her and thrashed her in the maize field. Thereafter, he lifted her sari and by putting her under threat ravished her. She, thereafter, came to her house and narrated about the incident to her sister-in-law (Gotani) Jayanti Devi. She states that she thereafter, took bath and washed clothes which she was wearing at the time of occurrence. She states that in the morning, the incident was reported to the villagers, who advised her to institute a case in the police station. She, thereafter, proceeded to the police station along with her sister-in-law Jayanti Devi and submitted a written report. The written report has duly been signed by the informant and her sister-in-law, Jayanti Devi has testified the same by putting her thumb impression over the same. On the basis of the written report submitted by the informant, a formal F.I.R. being Mokama P.S. Case No. 107 of 2005 dated 29.8.2005 was registered under [STATUTE] and investigation was taken up. The Officer-in-Charge of the Police Station handed over investigation of the case to one Devendra Pathak. The police investigated the case and submitted its report under Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure in the court. The learned Magistrate, before whom the police report was submitted, took cognizance of the offence and after supply of the police papers the case was committed to the court of sessions for trial. The trial court on receipt of the record, after commitment, framed charge under [STATUTE] , to which, the appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Accordingly, the trial commenced. In course of trial in support of the prosecution, in all, 8 witnesses were examined. P.W.-1 Brajnandan Mahto, a co-villager of the informant, is a hearsay witness. He states that on 29.8.2005 in the morning while he was going Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.547 of 2011 dt.15-10-2012 3 / 10 3 towards his field at 7 a.m., he heard some women of the village talking among themselves that the appellant had raped the informant, a widow. In cross- examination, he admits that he is not a witness to the occurrence of rape. He also failed to disclose the names of the women, who were talking about the incident. P.W. 2 Kishore Rajak is also a hearsay witness. In cross-examination, he admits that he had no personal knowledge about the occurrence. P.W.3 Anil Rajak and P.W. 4 Sunil Kumar are the nephews of the informant. They are also hearsay witnesses. They state that the informant disclosed them about the occurrence when she came back to her house in the night of 20.8.2005 at about 9.45 p.m. They admit in cross-examination that they had no personal knowledge about the occurrence. They admit that they did not go to the house of the appellant in the night and no effort was made by them to apprehend the appellant. P.W. 5 Shanti Devi is the informant as well as victim of the case. In chief, she states that on 28.8.2005 she got down from Intercity passenger at about 9.30 p.m. at Kanhaipur halt. She was coming from Rajendra Nagar, Patna after doing her duty. When she had proceeded about 10 paces from Kanhaipur halt, the appellant lifted her bodily and after taking her into the maize field, ravished her. When she was released by the appellant, she came crying to her house. She disclosed about the incident to her family members in the night. In the next morning, she came to the Mokama Police Station and narrated about the incident. The police officer took her signature. She proves her signature on the written statement, which has been marked as Ext.-1. She states that the police officer, thereafter, sent her for medical examination to P.M.C.H., Patna. She identified the appellant in the dock as the person who had ravished her. In cross-examination, she admits that when the mohalla people came to know about the occurrence, they Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.547 of 2011 dt.15-10-2012 4 / 10 4 came to her house. The local Mukhiya had also come to her house. The Mukhiya advised her to institute case in the police station and, as such, she went to the police station along with her sister-in-law and nephew to ins

Applicable IPC Section: 376

Statute Text:
Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. Rape. Whoever, commits an offence punishable under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 376 and in the course of such commission inflicts an injury which causes the death of the woman or causes the woman to be in a persistent vegetative state, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than twenty years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life, which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person's natural life, or with death.