Jharkhand High Court
Rajen Hembram vs The State Of Jharkhand ..... Opp. Party on 13 February, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Revision No. 384 of 2015
Rajen Hembram ..... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ..... Opp. Party
---------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
--------
For the Petitioner : Mr. R.S.P. Sinha, Sr. Advocate.
Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sinha, Advocate.
For the State : Mr. Bishwambhar Shastri, A.P.P.
---------
th
Order No. 11/Dated: 13 February, 2024
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The FIR was lodged by the prosecutrix stating inter alia that
about one year ago, while she was returning from Raghunathpur Haat
in the evening, present petitioner Rajen Hembram, met her and teased
her. When she briefed about the above matter to her father, then he
informed the same to the petitioner's father. Thereafter, the matter was
pacified through compromise between the parties. It is further alleged
that again, on the occasion of Sohrai Puja, on 04.11.2009, while she
was returning from dance at around 1:30 A.M., the present petitioner,
Rajen Hembram caught hold of her and forbid her from raising alarm
and forcibly established sexual intercourse with her on the false
assurance of marriage, till two nights. Thereafter, while he was
carrying her to his house on the second night, he left her on the way
and fled away. It is further alleged that a panchayati was convened and
father and other family members of the accused declined to attend the
panchayati. Hence, this case was lodged on 05.12.2009 at the police
station.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there was
love affairs between the victim and the petitioner, she is a major and
has fully consented to the alleged act, but due to non-solemnization of
marriage, she has lodged this false F.I.R. at the belated stage, after
lapse of considerable period, without offering any cogent explanation.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the
trial court, after conclusion of trial, has held the appellant guilty for
the offence under Section 376 I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for seven years along with fine of Rs. 5,000/-
with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that
thereafter, the present petitioner has preferred criminal appeal i.e. Cr.
Appeal No. 32 of 2014, which was dismissed and the judgment of
conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned trial court has
been confirmed vide judgment dated 15.12.2014.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has confined himself towards
quantum of sentence. It is urged that the occurrence is alleged to be of
the year 2009 and in the F.I.R. itself the victim has admitted that sexual
intercourse was committed by the petitioner assuring her about
solemnization of marriage, but without waiting any further, she has
lodged this instant case. Now, both the victim and the present
petitioner have settled their life by solemnizing marriage. Petitioner
has already undergone seven years' incarceration during trial of the
case and even after conclusion of the trial and has been sufficiently
punished for the offences levelled against him. Therefore, in alternate,
it is prayed that petitioner may be treated sympathetically in the matter
of sentence and liable for the sentence for imprisonment already
undergone.
List this case on 16.02.2024.
(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)
Sunil/
