IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.838 of 2007 Against the judgment and order dated 18.08.2007 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No. 1) Purnea in Sessions Trial No. 804 of 2005/ Trial No. 263of 2006. ========================================================== Raj Kumar Chauhan, Son of Sant Lal Chauhan, resident of Village-Harchandpur, P.S. Jalalgarh, District-Purnea. .... .... Appellant/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Respondent/s ========================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Shri. Raj Kumar, Advocate. For the Respondent/s : Shri. Ajay Mishra, Advocate. ========================================================== PRESENT THE HON’BLE SHRI. JUSTICE DHARNIDHAR JHA Dharnidhar Jha, J. Rabindra Nath Tagore has written in his elaborated short story “Post Master” That „inscrutable are the ways of woman‟s heart‟. If one could be searching for an illustration to show as to how inscrutable a woman‟s heart and how conspiring her mind could be, then one could not have a better illustrative case than the case in hand. 2. The lady complainant, Champa Devi, aged about 40 years having two children out of the wedlock from her husband, presented a complaint petition before the C.J.M. Purnea, which was registered as Complaint Case No. 419 of 2004. A copy of it was sent to police for investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.838 of 2007 dt.28-07-2011 2 Complainant stated that while her husband was away to sell the vegetables and her children to play out side, this appellant trespassed inside her house and committed rape upon her. 3. The police, ignoring some clinching documents, found the case true, which ultimately, went to trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-Cum-Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No. IV, Purnea, vide Sessions trial No. 804 of 2005, in which the solitary appellant Raj Kumar Chauhan was indicated of committing the offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. The judgment was delivered by the learned Presiding officer on 17.08.2007 and the learned judge, if I and permitted to say, was simply ignoring some of the most striking defence documents, the contents whereof had been brought on record by virtue of sections 145 and 157 etc. of the Evidence Act, to record a judgment of conviction by holding the charge proved and thereafter was passing an order of sentence by which the appellant was consigned to the precincts of jail for serving out rigorous imprisonment for ten years. 4. I have already narrated the facts and defence of the present appellant in the present appeal, which has been argued by Shri Raj Kumar, learned counsel appearing on Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.838 of 2007 dt.28-07-2011 3 behalf of the appellant. 5. While narrating the facts, I have barely mentioned as to how a Judge, who was in the rank of Additional Sessions Judge, was ignoring some of the supporting facts brought on record properly by the defence to probebilise its version. The narration of facts and events which I am likely to record may point out as to how present day judges miss to judge facts and thereby, in stead of administering justice, deliver injustice. 6. Prior to filing of the Complaint petition, which was bearing No. 931 of 2004, which was the basis of drawing up the F.I.R. of K. Nagar P.S Case No. 202 of 2004 (Ext.-2), the lady complainant has filed a complaint petition bearing no. 419 of 2004 (Ext.C). In that case she had stated as may appear from paragraph 38 of her evidence, when she was examined as P.W.1, that she was being regularly pressurized by her husband, who was none else than the full brother of the appellant to file a false case, alleging rape being committed upon her by the present appellant. 7. She denied the suggestion of the defence that she had made such statements. The defence has produced a copy of the complaint petition bearing no. 419 of 2004 (Ext. Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.838 of 2007 dt.28-07-2011 4 C) which is dated 17.05.2004, showing that Ext. C, was filed about two months prior to the filing of the present complaint petition. Proof of contents of a document, attention to which facts has been drawn by a party by cross-examining the witness who was the author of that document is permitted by Evidence Act, to be had, by the production of the documents itself. As such the defence produced Ext.-C and those statements, which appear in paragraph 38 of evidence of P.W.1, where she stated that because there was some litigation on sharing of the entitlements of her deceased father, who was a gangman in the Irrigation Department in the Government of Bihar, she was being pressurized by her husband to file a false complaint against this appellant. I have already pointed out that the present case, i.e. complaint case no. 931 of 2004 was presented before the C.J.M. Purnea on 15.07.2004 and by his order on 16.07.2004, a copy thereof was transmitted to the Officer In-Charge of K. Nagar Police Station for investigation. It was as clear an evidence as the light of the day indicating as why and how the present case had been brought about by the complainant and at whose behest, but the learned judge on account of having closed his mind to consider any evidence which can be produced Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.838 of 2007 dt.28-07-2011 5 legitimately by the defence by properly cross-examining the witness, was proceeding to commit the appellant due to having predetermined the result of the trial. The lady was complaining through Ext.C, against her husband that she was being pressurized to file a false case but was still coming out on account of the pressure being exerted by her by her life partner to file out and out a false case. It was inscrutable heart and a conspiring mind. 8. The single fact, which was introduced on the record of the present trial by cross examining the witness P.W.1 in paragraph 38 could have been enough to record that it was out and out a frivolous, malicious prosecution, which was heaped upon an innocent person, like, the present appellant, by an artful lady with inscrutable heart and conspiring mind. 9. In the result, the appeal succeeds by allowing the order of conviction and the sentence passed upon the appellant and both are here by set aside. The appellant is in custody. He shall be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other case. Patna High Court, Patna Dated 28th July 2011 A.F.R./Devendra/ ( Dharnidhar Jha, J)