Jharkhand High Court
Nilratan Mandal vs The State Of Jharkhand on 21 November, 2024
Author: Ananda Sen
Bench: Ananda Sen
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
.........
(Against the judgment of conviction dated 09.10.2002 and order of
sentence dated 10.10.2002 passed by learned 9th Additional Sessions
Judge, Hazaribag, in S.T. No.503 of 2001).
.........
Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No. 827 of 2002
Nilratan Mandal, S/o Shri Nitya Nand Mandal, R/o Village Silli, P.O.
Silli, District Ranchi ..... Appellant
Versus
1.The State of Jharkhand
2.Jhumri Bala, D/o Gaya Ram Manjhi, R/o Village Basaruli, P.S. Silli, T.O.P.
Muri, District Ranchi .... Respondent
WITH
Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No. 185 of 2003
Raj Mohan Bhakta @ Raj Mohan Bhokta, S/o Late Sukra Bhokta, R/o
Village Tetebanda, P.S. Silli, District Ranchi ..... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... Respondent
.........
For the Appellant : Mr. Yadunandan Mishra, Advocate
Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Chatur Prasad Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, Spl. Public Prosecutor
Mr. Santosh Kr. Shukla, AddI. Public Prosecutor
-----------
PRESENT
Sri Ananda Sen, J.
Sri Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.
JUDGMENT
21.11.2024
By Court:
Heard, learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. Yadunandan Mishra
and learned counsel for the State, Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, Spl. Public
Prosecutor and Mr. Santosh Kr. Shukla, AddI. Public Prosecutor.
2. Both the criminal appeals are directed against the conviction of
these appellants under Sections 341, 323, 376(2g) and 506 of the
Indian Penal Code vide judgment of conviction dated 09.10.2002
passed by the learned 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribag, in
S.T. No.503 of 2001 and order of sentence dated 10.10.2002, whereby
they have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for ten years
with fine of Rs.500/-, imprisonment of six months under Section 323
of IPC, imprisonment for one year under Section 506 of IPC and
imprisonment for one months under Section 341 of IPC.
3. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that there is
doubt about the identity of the person, who has lodged the F.I.R.,
thus the entire prosecution case is vitiated. He further submits that as
per the F.I.R. informant is P.W.-2, who is the victim, but the victim
stated that his father had also narrated the fact to the police officer
and she had countersigned the said document which suggest that the
actual informant is the father and not the informant. He further
submits that victims were also examined by the Doctor, but he did
not find any injury on the private part of the victims, which would
suggest that no rape has been committed. It is the case that because of
grudge, these appellants have been falsely implicated in this case.
Hence, the learned counsel for the appellants pray for acquittal of the
appellants.
4. The learned counsel for the State submits that Doctor has found
injury on the private part of the victims and has opined that there
was sexual penetration. The statement of both the victims clearly
suggests that rape has been committed which has been corroborated
by the evidence of the Doctor. He further submits that the Trial Court
is correct in passing the judgment of conviction and order of
sentence, which requires no interference.
5. The prosecution case based on the fardbeyan of P.W.-2- victim is
that on 14.03.2001, she stated that she along with another victim and
parents and others were traveling in a train and were going to the
house of their relative at Chokor Bera. At about 09.00 P.M. at night,
they alighted at Harubera railway station. The appellants were also
traveling the same train. When these victims and their family left the
Harubera railway station and proceeded at a few distance, these
appellants and others confronted them, drove their parents by
assaulting them and carried the informant and other victims to the
jungle. In the jungle, rape was committed upon the informant and
one another victim. One of the appellants had threatened them by
brandishing on fire arm. She further stated that due to the rape their
garments were stained with blood and semen of the appellants. She
stated that another minor girl who was taken was not raped. They
returned in the morning and when they reached their village-
Purabdih, they saw crowed of 15-20 persons, who gathered, after
receiving the information from their parents about abduction of these
girls. She narrated that one of the miscreants had visited their house
earlier on several occasion. The person was identified as Hira Mahto
who was brother-in-law of Kandru Mahto of village- Katadih. When
family members of the victim and police party were going in search
of Hira Mahto towards Muri, on the way near Katadih they saw four
persons standing together whom the victims identified to be the
rapist. They were apprehended and they disclosed their identity. The
victims claimed that they have identified the accused persons at the
time of commission of rape.
6. On the basis of the aforesaid fardbeyan, FIR was registered being
Gola P.S. Case No.20 of 2001 under Sections 341, 323, 376/34 and 506
of the Indian Penal Code. The police after investigation filed
chargesheet against these appellants to which the Court took
cognizance and committed the case to the Court of Sessions. As the
appellants pleaded not guilty, charges were framed under Sections
323, 341, 506 and 376(g) of the Indian Penal Code and they were put
on trial.
7. Altogether nine witnesses have been examined in this case by the
prosecution, who are as follows:-
P.W.-1 Victim
P.W.-2 Victim
P.W.-3 Savitri Devi
P.W.-4 Gojan Manjhi
P.W.-5 Suresh Bediya
P.W.-6 Dr. R.S. Bandana
P.W.-7 Shankar Pd. Jha
P.W.-8 Dwarika Prasad Mahto
P.W.-9 Syed Noor Mohamad
8. The following documents were also exhibited by the
prosecution:-
Exhibit-1 Signature of P.W.-1 on fardbeyan.
Exhibit-1/1: Signature of P.W.-2 on fardbeyan
Exhibit-2: Signature on injury report
Exhibit-2/1 Signature on injury report
Exhibit-3: Signature on fardbeyan
Exhibit-4 Formal F.I.R.
Exhibit-5 Seizure list
Exhibit- 6 Medical report
Exhibit-6/1 Medical report
Exhibit-6/2 Medical report
Exhibit-6/3 Medical report
Exhibit-7 F.S.L. Report
9. This is a case of commission of rape by these appellants upon
tow victim girls who are minor. In a case of rape, the most important
witness is the victim and the Doctor. It is well settled that if the
victim support the case of the prosecution and if they are reliable,
the accused can be convicted on the sole testimony of the victims.
This proposition has been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the case of Ravindra vs. State of M.P., reported in (2015) 4 SCC
491. In the said judgment at para-4 the Court has held as under:-
"4. After considering the evidence adduced by the parties, the High Court was
of the view that it is well settled that the woman who is a victim of sexual
assault is not an accomplice to the crime. Her evidence cannot be tested with
suspicion as that of an accomplice. As a matter of fact her evidence is similar to
the evidence of an injured complainant or witness. The testimony of the
prosecutrix, if found reliable by itself may be sufficient to convict the culprit
and no corroboration of her evidence is necessary. Secondly, in prosecution of
rape, the law does not require corroboration. The evidence of the prosecutrix
may sustain a conviction. It is only by way of abundant caution that the court
may look for some corroboration so as to satisfy its conscience and rule out any
false accusations. Thus, the High Court was of the view that the trial court had
not committed any error in convicting the appellant under Section 376 IPC.
The statement of the prosecutrix was reliable. Prompt FIR was lodged by her
and no further corroboration of her statement was required."
10. Keeping the aforesaid proposition in the mind, we have gone
through the evidence of these victims i.e. P.W.-1 and P.W.-2. P.W.-2
is the informant. Both of them stated in similar manner that while
they alighted from the train and proceeded and left the railway
station, the accused persons drove of their parents and caught them
and they threatened them with knife and pistol and had taken them
to the forest and committed rape upon them. They clearly stated that
because of the rape their garments were stained with blood and
semen. They also stated that in morning when they reached
Purabdih, 15-16 persons were searching them. The victims then
narrated the entire occurrence. Thereafter the police and the victims
went in search of the miscreants and they were caught on the way.
P.W.-1 and P.W.-2 proved their signature on the fardbeyan, which
was marked as Exhibits-1 and 1/1. They stated that their cloths were
seized by the police for examination. They also withstood the test of
cross-examination. Thus, from the statement of these two victims,
we find that they have supported the prosecution case that they
were raped by these appellants. The witnesses also identified the
appellants and narrated what act they played at the time of rape.
They identified the miscreant who was having a knife in their hand
as Nilratan Mandal. They stated that Rajkumar Bhogta was holding
the pistol. They also identified the person who was standing empty
handed.
11. Another important witness is the Doctor. The Doctor P.W.-6
examined both these victims i.e. P.W.-1 and P.W.-2. She found that
there is internal injury on the victims. Their hymen was torn and
lacerated and bleeds on touching the private parts. Though she
opined that definite opinion of rape cannot be given as spermatozoa
not found in vaginal swab, but she stated that the injury might be
due to penetration of male private part. She also found bleeding in
the private part of these victims. The medical report was marked as
Exhibits- 6 and 6/1. Thus, from the evidence of the Doctor it is quite
clear that the victims were sexually assaulted and were raped.
12. Exhibit-7 is a very important document, which is F.S.L. report.
The wearing apparels of the girls were sent to the Forensic Science
Laboratory and as per the report, we find that semen was found on
the apparels. This also suggest that rape was committed upon the
victims.
13. P.W.-4 is the father of the victim (P.W.-1). She stated that the
girls were raped and they identified the accused, who were
apprehended.
Investigating Officer stated that the victims had identified the
accused when they were standing near Katadih and stated that these
appellants have committed rape upon them.
14. From the aforementioned materials which has been put forth by
the prosecution by way of evidence, we find that the prosecution has
been able to prove the guilt of these appellants beyond all reasonable
doubt. The prosecution has been able to prove the commission of
rape not only by the evidence of the victims, but also by medical
evidence and the Forensic Science Report. There is nothing in the
evidence of these girls to disbelieve their evidence. They have also
identified the appellants to be the perpetrator of the crime. There is
nothing in record to remotely suggest that the appellants were
falsely implicated in this case. The Trial Court has correctly
appreciated all the evidence and convicted the appellants under
Section 341, 323, 376(2g) and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
13. We find no merit in these appeals. Accordingly, both these
Criminal Appeals stand dismissed. The judgment of conviction
dated 09.10.2002 and order of sentence dated 10.10.2002, passed by
learned 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribag, in S.T. No.503 of
2001, needs no interference.
14. The bail of the appellants is cancelled. The appellants are
directed to surrender before the Trial Court to serve the rest of
sentence. If the appellants do not surrender, the Trial Court is
directed to take appropriate steps as per law.
15. Let Trial Court Records along with a copy of this judgment be
sent to the concerned trial court forthwith.
(Ananda Sen, J.)
(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.)
High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi
Dated 21/11/2024
AFR /R.S./ Cp 03.
