Hare Ram Mandal vs The State Of Bihar
2025 Latest Caselaw 3389 Patna

Patna High Court

Hare Ram Mandal vs The State Of Bihar on 22 April, 2025

Author: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad

Bench: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, Ashok Kumar Pandey

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                 CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No.813 of 2022
       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-163 Year-2012 Thana- PIPRA District- Supaul
======================================================
Hare Ram Mandal, Aged about 45 years, Gender-Male, Son of Late Mahabir
Mandal, R/O Village- Thumha Bazar, P.S.- Pipra, District- Supaul
                                                              ... ... Appellant
                                Versus
The State of Bihar
                                                           ... ... Respondent
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s     :        Mr. Hriday Narayan Harshit, Advocate
For the Respondent/s    :        Mr. Abhimanyu Sharma, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
        and
        HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)
Date : 22-04-2025

            Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned

Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

            2. The present appeal has been preferred for setting

aside the judgment of conviction dated 07.05.2013 (hereinafter

referred to as the 'impugned judgment') and the order of sentence

dated 13.05.2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 'impugned order')

passed by learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Supaul

(hereinafter called the 'learned Trial Court') in S.T. No. 278 of

2012/T.R. No. 55 of 2012 arising out of Pipra P.S. Case No. 163 of

2012, G.R. No. 1714 of 2012 whereby and whereunder the learned

Trial Court has been pleased to find the appellant guilty of the

offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (in short
 Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.813 of 2022 dt.22-04-2025
                                           2/13




       'I.P.C.') and directed the appellant to undergo a sentence of

       imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- for the

       offence punishable under Section 376 I.P.C. In the event of default

       in payment of fine, the accused-convict would further undergo

       rigorous imprisonment for three months.

                     Prosecution Case

                     3. The prosecution story is based on the fardbeyan of

       the victim aged about nine years recorded by S.I. Subhash Ram on

       02.10.2012

at 11:30 hours in Primary Heath Centre, Pipra. In her

fardbeyan, the victim alleged that on the said date (02.10.2012) in

the morning at 8 O' Clock she had gone to play in the courtyard of

Hare Ram Mandal (the appellant) where the daughter of Hare Ram

Mandal was there. She alleged that Hare Ram Mandal sent his

daughter outside for some work, his wife was cleaning rice on the

hand pump in the courtyard. She has further alleged that at the

same time, Hare Ram Mandal caught hold of her hand and before

the victim could have understood anything, he put one of his hands

on to her mouth and made her to lie flat on the verandah

whereafter he opened her undergarment and committed wrong act

with her. The victim alleged that when she got pain and shouted

then he left her and fled away. After wearing back her

undergarment, she came back to her maternal grandmother, her Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.813 of 2022 dt.22-04-2025

frock and undergarment were having blood marks. She disclosed

the entire occurrence to her maternal grandmother and her mother

thereafter her maternal grandmother told it to the neighbours and

brought the victim to Pipra hospital for treatment. The fardbeyan

of the victim has been witnessed by her maternal grandmother,

(P.W.-2). On the basis of the said fardbeyan, formal First

Information Report (Exhibit '5') has been registered on

02.10.2012 at 12:15 P.M.

4. After investigation of the case, the police submitted a

charge-sheet against the appellant for the offences under Section

376 I.P.C. Cognizance was taken by the learned Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Supaul on 17.11.2012 and the case was committed to

the Court of Sessions on 04.12.2012. The charges were read over

to the appellant which he denied and claimed to be tried.

5. To substantiate the charge, prosecution has examined

as many as thirteen witnesses and adduced several documentary

evidences which have been marked exhibits. The list of witnesses

and the list of exhibits are as under:-

List of Prosecution Witnesses

PW-1 Victim (X) PW-2 Maternal Grandmother of the victim PW-3 Mother of the victim PW-4 Nutan Verma PW-5 Arun Kr. Singh PW-6 Maternal Grandfather of the victim Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.813 of 2022 dt.22-04-2025

PW-7 Dr. Suman Kumari PW-8 Mihir Kr. Verma PW-9 Dinesh Choudhary PW-10 Krishna Bahadur Choudhary PW-11 Satyendra Kumar PW-12 Brahamdeo Choudhary PW- 13 Shyam Sundar Singh

List of Exhibits brought on behalf of the Prosecution

Ext-1 Injury Report of the private part of prosecutrix Ext- 1/1 and Radiological findings of prosecutrix by 1/3 Dr. Arun Kr. Singh (P.W. 5) and Dr. Mihir Kr. Verma (P.W. 8) respectively.

                      Ext-1/2    Injury report given by P.W. 7 .
                       Ext-2     Signature of witness Dinesh Choudhary
                                 on fardbayan.
                       Ext-3     Production -cum-seizure list of the
                                 clothes of Prosecutrix.
                      Ext-3/1    Signature of PW 10 on production cum
                                 seizure list.
                      Ext-3/2    Signature of P.W. 11 on seizure list of
                                 clothes of accused.
                      Ext-3/3    Signature of P.W. 12 on seizure list of
                                 clothes of accused.
                       Ext-4     Fardbayan of prosecutrix.
                       Ext-5     Endorsement on the fardbayan as to
                                 registration of the case.
                      Ext-5/1    Signature of S.I. Laxmi Kant on formal
                                 F.I.R.
                       Ext-6     Production cum seizure list of the clothes
                                 of prosecutrix
                      Ext-6/1    Seizure list of clothes of accused.
                       Ext-7     Case diary.

6. The learned Trial Court also recorded the statement of

the accused-appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C. In his statement,

the accused pleaded innocence. The defence examined three

witnesses to prove the innocence of the appellant. The defence Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.813 of 2022 dt.22-04-2025

witnesses are the father-in-law, wife and married daughter of the

appellant who have deposed as D.W.-1, D.W.-2 and D.W.-3

respectively.

Findings of the Learned Trial Court

7. The learned Trial Court has held that the testimony

of the victim (P.W.-1) is very inspiring and unimpeachable,

therefore, it cannot be disbelieved. It has also been found that her

evidence is strongly supported/corroborated by the medical

evidence of P.W.-4, PW-5 and PW-7 and these evidences together

established the prosecution case.

Submissions on behalf of the Appellant

8. Learned counsel for the appellant has assailed the

impugned judgment on various grounds. It is submitted that there

is no eye witness to the occurrence. The opinion of the Doctor

(P.W.-5) as to the age of P.W.-1 being 12 years would show that the

victim was at the age of onset of her menstruation and this will be

the reason for finding blood in the clothes of P.W.-1.

9. Learned counsel submits that the clothes of the victim

and the appellant were seized by the Investigating Officer but

those were not sent for chemical examination to the Forensic

Science Laboratory, therefore, there is no report corroborating that

the victim was bleeding. It is his further submission that the Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.813 of 2022 dt.22-04-2025

prosecution has not brought any documentary evidence regarding

the alleged extra judicial confession made by the appellant before

the villagers/relatives and therefore, that part of the evidence

would not be reliable.

10. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the

defence witnesses have stated that the prosecution side was putting

pressure upon the accused-appellant to sell a homestead piece of

land. The defence witnesses are consistent that because of this land

dispute, the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case.

Submissions of the State

11. On the other hand, learned Additional Public

Prosecutor for the State has opposed the appeal. It is submitted that

on perusal of the judgment of the learned Trial Court, it would

appear that the Trial Court had meticulously examined all the

evidences available on the record. The victim is a minor girl who

has withstood her cross examination and the defence has failed to

create any dent in the credibility of this witness.

12. It is submitted that the offence was reported to

police within three hours of the occurrence, as the victim was

taken to the Primary Health Centre, Pipra for treatment and in

course of her treatment, her fardbeyan was recorded police. Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.813 of 2022 dt.22-04-2025

13. It is submitted that Dr. Suman Kumari (P.W.-7) who

was posted as a Medical Officer at Pipra Primary Health Centre on

02.10.2012 had examined the victim (P.W.-1) and found several

injuries on her body including bleeding from her vagina due to

musocal tear. The Doctor has also found tear of vaginal membrane

due to physical contact. The report of Doctor (P.W.-7) has been

marked as Exhibit '1/2'. The evidence of Dr. Mihir Kumar Verma

(P.W.-8) and that of Dr. Arun Kumar Singh (P.W.-5) who are the

Doctors of Sadar Hospital, Supaul would also support the

prosecution case.

14. It is submitted that in this case, the I.O. has not been

examined but that will not cause any prejudice to the defence

inasmuch as in this case, the place of occurrence has not been

questioned by the defence and the immediate circumstances which

were available after the commission of the act have been duly

proved by the prosecution witnesses.

Consideration

15. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and

learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State as also perused

the trial court records.

16. In this case, the victim is the informant of the crime.

She is a minor girl aged about 12 years as per the medical Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.813 of 2022 dt.22-04-2025

evidence. She has been examined as P.W.-1. In her examination-in-

chief, she has reiterated her case on the line of her fardbeyan. The

examination-in-chief is consistent and from the pattern of cross-

examination, it would appear that the defence has not questioned

her as to her presence in the courtyard of the appellant on the given

date and time of occurrence. In Paragraph '6' of her deposition,

while answering the questions put to her in cross-examination, this

witness has stated firmly that she was in the courtyard of the

appellant for about half an hour. The victim has deposed firmly

and without any deviation from her earlier statement made before

the police. The defence suggested the victim (P.W.-1) that there

was some quarrel between the appellant and the maternal

grandmother of the victim and the people who reached at the place

of occurrence said that Hare Ram was mad and for this reason, he

had committed the act. The cross-examination of the defence

nowhere questions the occurrence which had taken place in the

house of the appellant. The defence suggested that Hare Ram (the

appellant) had committed the act because he is mad and he had

done so in the condition of his madness. These suggestions were

immediately rejected by way of denial in the cross-examination of

P.W.-1.

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.813 of 2022 dt.22-04-2025

17. The evidence of the maternal grandmother of the

victim who has been examined as P.W.-2 would show that she has

deposed on the immediate circumstance which she came to know

from the victim on reaching her house after she was subjected to

rape. P.W.-2 brought victim to Pipra. Dinesh Chaudhary (P.W.-9) and

Krishna Bahadur Chaudhary (P.W.-10) had also accompanied the

victim (P.W.-2) to the police station. She has deposed on the date of

occurrence that the victim was treated in Supaul hospital. She

identified her thumb impression on the fardbeyan. She has also stated

that police had seized the clothes of the victim and the clothes of the

victim are still with the police.

18. This Court finds that on record, the seizure list of the

clothes of the victim is lying. The seizure list has been marked

Ext.-'6'. P.W.-9 and P.W.-10 are the seizure list witnesses and the

seizure list would show that the police had seized the frock and

undergarment of the victim on which blood mark was present. The

police had also seized a cloth of the appellant and the seizure list

(Ext- '6/1') has been prepared by S.I. Suhas Ram. It is, therefore,

evident that the clothes of the victim and the accused both were

seized by the police and the seizure list have been duly proved by

P.W.-9 and P.W.-10. P.W.-10 has stated to the extent that the frock

was of parrot colour and the pant on which blood mark was present

were seized by the police.

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.813 of 2022 dt.22-04-2025

19. This Court has also noticed that Satendra Kumar

(P.W.-11) and Brahamdeo Chaudhary (P.W.-12) are the two

witnesses of the seizure of the cloth of the appellant.

20. The injuries of the victim have been proved by the

Doctor of Pipra, Primary Health Centre as well as the Doctors of the

Sadar Hospital, Supaul. Dr. Suman Kumari (P.W.-7) is the first

Doctor who had treated the victim in the Primary Health Centre at

Pipra on 02.10.2012 at 01:15 P.M. She has found the following

injuries:-

"(i) Abrasion of Chest ½" x ½"

(ii) Abrasion of Hip

(iii) Bleeding per vagina due to musocal tear

(iv) Tear at vaginal membrane due to physical contact."

This witness was suggested that her report is an ante-dated

report which she denied and she had proved the injury report as

Ext.- '1/2'.

21. Dr. Mihir Kumar Verma (P.W.-8) is another Doctor

who has treated the victim (P.W.-1) in Sadar hospital, Supaul. He had

examined the blood of the victim and found that it was of Group -

A+. Her injury report has been marked Ext.-1/3.

22. The victim was also examined by the Doctor Arun

Kumar Singh (P.W.-5) in Sadar hospital, Supaul. he has conducted

the radiological examination on the victim and on the basis of the

radiological findings the age of the victim was found between 10-12 Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.813 of 2022 dt.22-04-2025

years. His injury report has been marked as Ext.-1/1. These Doctors

have been examined and cross-examined. It is evident from the

opinion of the Doctor particularly the first Doctor Suman Kumari

(P.W.-7) that the victim (P.W.-1) had injuries on her private parts. She

had suffered tear of vaginal membrame due to physical contact. The

evidence of the Doctor (P.W.-7) clearly corroborates the prosecution

version as disclosed by the victim (P.W.-1).

23. This Court finds that the mother of the victim has also

been examined as (P.W.-3) and she has supported the prosecution

case. She had closely seen the victim and had found that the victim

was bleeding from her private part as she has been subjected to

wrong act.

24. On perusal of the entire evidence on the record, this

Court finds that the learned trial court has duly considered the entire

prosecution evidence available on the record. So far as the evidence

of the defence witnesses are concerned, they have deposed that the

accused-appellant has been falsely implicated on account of land

dispute. The statement of the defence witnesses are not consistent

with the case of the defence as set up during the cross-examination of

the prosecution witnesses. The evidence of the defence witnesses are

not inspiring confidence.

25. In the opinion of this Court, the victim (P.W.-1) of this

case is a sterling witness. In the case of Rai Sandeep Alias Deepu Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.813 of 2022 dt.22-04-2025

Versus State (NCT of Delhi) reported in (2012) 8 SCC 21, the

Hon'ble Supreme Court has considered as to who may be put in the

category of "sterling witness". Paragraph '22' of the judgment in the

case of Rai Sandeep Alias Deepu (supra) is being reproduced

hereunder for a ready reference:-

"22 In our considered opinion, the "sterling witness"

should be of a very high quality and calibre whose version should, therefore, be unassailable. The court considering the version of such witness should be in a position to accept it for its face value without any hesitation. To test the quality of such a witness, the status of the witness would be immaterial and what would be relevant is the truthfulness of the statement made by such a witness. What would be more relevant would be the consistency of the statement right from the starting point till the end, namely, at the time when the witness makes the initial statement and ultimately before the court. It should be natural and consistent with the case of the prosecution qua the accused. There should not be any prevarication in the version of such a witness. The witness should be in a position to withstand the cross-examination of any length and howsoever strenuous it may be and under no circumstance should give room for any doubt as to the factum of the occurrence, the persons involved, as well as the sequence of it. Such a version should have co- relation with each and every one of other supporting material such as the recoveries made, the weapons used, the manner of offence committed, the scientific evidence and the expert opinion. The said version should consistently match with the version of every other witness. It can even be stated that it should be akin to the test applied in the case of circumstantial evidence where there should not be any missing link in the chain of circumstances to hold the accused guilty of the offence alleged against him. Only if the version of such a witness qualifies the above test as well as all other such similar tests to be applied, can it be held that such a witness can be called as a "sterling witness"

whose version can be accepted by the court without any Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.813 of 2022 dt.22-04-2025

corroboration and based on which the guilty can be punished. To be more precise, the version of the said witness on the core spectrum of the crime should remain intact while all other attendant materials, namely, oral, documentary and material objects should match the said version in material particulars in order to enable the court trying the offence to rely on the core version to sieve the other supporting materials for holding the offender guilty of the charge alleged."

26. In our considered opinion, the quality of the

evidence of the victim (P.W.-1) would show that she has duly

understood all the questions and her competence to depose was

never doubted by the prosecution. She has withstood the cross-

examination as well. The corroborative evidence is in form of the

injury report of P.W.-5.

27. We find no error in the impugned judgment and

order.

28. In result, this appeal is dismissed.

29. Let trial court records together with the judgment be

sent down to the learned trial court.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)

( Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Neha/-

AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date          25.04.2025
Transmission Date       25.04.2025