Patna High Court
Surendra Rai vs The State Of Bihar on 4 March, 2025
Author: Sandeep Kumar
Bench: Sandeep Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4520 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-108 Year-2016 Thana- JANDAHA District- Vaishali
======================================================
Surendra Rai, son of Baiju Rai Resident of Village - Mahua Mukundpur
(panchmukhi Chowk), P.S.- Mahua, Distt.- Vaishali at Hajipur.
... ... Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Saroj Kumar Sharma, Advocate
Mr. Anupam Bahadur, Advocate
Mr. Vikash Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Syed Ashfaque Ahmad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 04-03-2025
In the present appeal, the appellant has challenged
the judgment of conviction dated 15.09.2021 and the order of
sentence dated 21.09.2021 passed by the learned Exclusive
Special Judge, POCSO-cum-Children Court-cum-Additional
District & Sessions Judge, VI, Vaishali at Hajipur, in G.R.
No.2706 of 2016, arising out of Jandaha P.S. Case No.108 of
2016, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section
376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code (for short "I.P.C.") and under
section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences
Act, 2012 (for short "POCSO Act"). For the offence under
section 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code, the appellant has
been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years
and fine of Rs.51,000/-, in case of default of payment of fine, he
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4520 of 2021 dt.04-03-2025
will further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. For the
offence under section 8 of the POCSO Act, the appellant has
been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years
and fine of Rs.25,000/-, in case of default of payment of fine, he
will further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Both
the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
2. The informant namely, Sonelal Singh, gave
his fardbeyan before the police on 12.07.2016 alleging therein
that on 11.07.2016 he along with his minor daughter, aged about
10 years, went to the house of his brother-in-law for attending a
marriage. The informant further alleged that he along with his
daughter went in Barat and when the Barat reached at the
bride's house, he left his daughter in the vehicle to watch the
jewellery kept in the vehicle. Thereafter, everyone became busy
in the said marriage. In the meantime, when the time came to
present the jewellery to the bride, the said vehicle was not found
at the place where it was parked and his daughter was also not
present there and therefore, the informant along with other
villagers started searching the vehicle and ultimately the said
vehicle was found to have been parked one km away from the
house of the bride near a school. When the informant and other
persons went inside the said school, they saw, in the light of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4520 of 2021 dt.04-03-2025
torch, that his daughter was in objectionable position with the
driver of the said vehicle. After seeing the informant, his
daughter started crying and said that the driver of the vehicle
committed wrong with her and thereafter she became
unconscious. When the villagers nabbed the driver, he disclosed
his name as Surendra Rai. Thereafter, the daughter of the
informant was taken to the local hospital where she was treated.
When the local police came, the driver of the vehicle was
handed over to the police.
3. After recording of the fardbeyan, a formal
FIR being Jandaha P.S. Case No.108 of 2016 dated 12.07.20216
was registered for the offences under section 376 of the Indian
Penal Code and under sections 4, 6, 8 and 10 of the POCSO Act
against the appellant. After institution of the FIR, the police
proceeded with the investigation and after completion of
investigation charge-sheet was submitted against the appellant
under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and under sections
4, 6, 8 and 10 of the POCSO Act vide charge-sheet No.183 of
2016 dated 30.09.2016.
4. After submission of the charge-sheet, the
learned Special Judge took cognizance against the appellant
under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and under sections
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4520 of 2021 dt.04-03-2025
4, 6, 8 and 10 of the POCSO Act vide order dated 17.04.2017.
By order dated 24.08.2017, the charges were framed against the
appellant under section 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code and
under section 4, 6, 8 and 10 of the POCSO Act.
5. During the course of trial, altogether eleven
witnesses were examined in support of the prosecution case,
which are as under :-
P.W.-1 Sudhir Singh (uncle of the bride)
P.W.-2 Fudan Singh (local villager)
P.W.-3 Ramsevak Singh
P.W.-4 Bhola Kumar (brother of the bride)
P.W.-5 Dr. Shailendra Kumar (Pathologist)
P.W.-6 Manju Devi (mother of the bride)
P.W.-7 Victim
P.W.-8 Rakesh Singh
P.W.-9 Sonelal Singh (father of the victim)
P.W.-10 Sanju Devi @ Shanti Devi (mother of the victim)
P.W.-11 Jyoti Kumari (Investigating Officer)
6. Apart from the oral evidences, the
documentary evidences were also exhibited on behalf of the
prosecution, which are as follows:-
Exhibit- 1 Signature of Sudhir Singh over the Fardbeyan
Exhibit- 1/1 Fardbeyan
Exhibit- 2 Signature of Sudhir Singh on the seizure list
Exhibit- 2/1 Signature of Fudan Singh over the seizure list
Exhibit- 3 Pathological requisition
Exhibit- 4 Pathological Report
Exhibit- 5 Dental requisition
Exhibit- 6 Statement of the victim recorded under section
164 of the Cr.P.C.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4520 of 2021 dt.04-03-2025
Exhibit- 7 Statement of the victim recorded before the
police
Exhibit- 8 Formal First Information Report
Exhibit- 9 Production-cum-Seizure list
Exhibit1-10 Application to submit the cloth of the victim for
forensic examination.
Exhibit-11 Charge-sheet.
7. After completion of prosecution evidence,
the statement of the appellant was recorded under section 313 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, in which the appellant denied
the allegation and stated that he is innocent and has falsely been
implicated in the present case.
8. The trial court, upon appreciation of the
evidence adduced at the trial, has found the appellant guilty of
the offences and has sentenced him to imprisonment and fine, as
noted above, by its impugned judgment and order.
9. Learned counsel for the appellant has
submitted that while convicting the appellant, the trial court has
failed to appreciate the fact that there are serious contradictions
in the statement of the informant and the victim. He has further
submitted that the trial court has failed to appreciate the fact that
the prosecution has failed to examine the persons residing near
the so-called place of occurrence and the prosecution has failed
to establish any cogent reason for commission of the
occurrence.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4520 of 2021 dt.04-03-2025
10. It has been submitted by learned counsel for
the appellant that no independent witness has been examined by
the prosecution side and the witnesses who have been examined
are related to the prosecution side. It has also been submitted
that there has been delay in filing the F.I.R. and though the
victim (P.W.-7) has supported the case but Dr. Priyanka
(S.M.O.), Sadar Hospital, Hajipur, has not deposed.
11. Learned counsel for the State has supported
the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence and has
submitted that the victim girl who is aged about 10 years' old
has withstood the cross-examination and has supported the
prosecution case. She has no reason to falsely implicate the
appellant in the present case.
12. I have considered the submissions of the
parties and perused the materials on record.
13. The victim (P.W.-7) in her statement before
the Investigating Officer as well as before the Court has
consistently stated that she was sleeping in the car and the car
was taken by the appellant where he committed rape with her
and also threatened her. Other witnesses including the father,
mother of the victim girl and P.W.-4, Bhola Kumar, have
supported the prosecution case.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4520 of 2021 dt.04-03-2025
14. P.W.-4, Bhola Kumar, is the person who
went looking for the car and the victim girl in the night and
found the victim girl in the school where the appellant had
committed rape with her. The appellant was caught there and
thereafter the F.I.R. was lodged and the victim was examined by
the doctor. The appellant was arrested on the spot by the police.
15. P.W.-5 is one Dr. Shailendra Kumar Verma,
who is working as Pathologist in the Hajipur Sadar Hospital. He
has examined the victim girl as per the requisition and found
non-motile spermatozoa and R.B.C. cells on the body of the
victim girl and he had submitted the pathological report, which
is marked as Exhibit-3/1. He had proved the medical report of
Dr. Priyanka, which is marked as Exhibit-4. The medical report
(Exhibit-4) of Dr. Priyanka supports the fact that sexual assault
was committed upon the victim.
16. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
the State of Punjab vs. Gurmit Singh & Ors. reported as 1996
AIR 1393 : (1996) 2 SCC 384 has held as follows:-
"...The courts must, while evaluating evidence,
remain alive to the fact that in a case of rape, no
self-respecting woman would come forward in a
court just to make a humiliating statement
against her honour such as is involved in the
commission of rape on her. In cases involving
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4520 of 2021 dt.04-03-2025
sexual molestation, supposed considerations
which have no material effect on the veracity of
the prosecution case or even discrepancies in
the statement of the prosecutrix should not,
unless the discrepancies are such which are of
fatal nature, be allowed to throw out an
otherwise reliable prosecution case. The
inherent bashfulness of the females and the
tendency to conceal outrage of sexual
aggression are factors which the Courts should
not over-look. The testimony of the victim in
such cases is vital and unless there are
compelling reasons which necessitate looking
for corroboration of her statement, the courts
should find no difficulty to act on the testimony
of a victim of sexual assault alone to convict an
accused where her testimony inspires confidence
and is found to be reliable. Seeking
corroboration of her statement before relying
upon the same, as a rule, in such cases amounts
to adding insult to injury. Why should the
evidence of a girl of a woman who complains of
rape or sexual molestation, be viewed with
doubt, disbelief or suspicion? The Court while
appreciating the evidence of a prosecutrix may
look for some assurance of her statement to
satisfy its judicial conscience, since she is a
witness who is interested in the outcome of the
charge levelled by her, but there is no
requirement of law to insist upon corroboration
of her statement to base conviction of an
accused. The evidence of a victim of sexual
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4520 of 2021 dt.04-03-2025
assault stands almost at par with the evidence of
an injured witness and to an extent is even more
reliable. Just as a witness who has sustained
some injury in the occurrence, which is not
found to be self inflicted, is considered to be a
good witness in the sense that he is least likely
to shield the real culprit, the evidence of a
victim of a sexual offence is entitled to great
weight, absence of corroboration
notwithstanding. Corroborative evidence is not
an imperative component of judicial credence in
every case of rape. Corroboration as a
condition for judicial reliance on the testimony
of the prosecutrix is not a requirement of law
but a guidance of prudence under given
circumstances. It must not be over-looked that a
woman or a girl subjected to sexual assault is
not an accomplice to the crime but is a victim of
another persons lust and it is improper and
undesirable to test her evidence with a certain
amount of suspicion, treating her as if she were
an accomplice. Inferences have to be drawn
from a given set of facts and circumstances with
realistic diversity and not dead uniformity lest
that type of rigidity in the shape of rule of law is
introduced through a new form of testimonial
tyranny making justice a casualty. Courts
cannot cling to a fossil formula and insist upon
corroboration even if, taken as a whole, the case
spoken of by the victim of sex crime strikes the
judicial mind as probable..."
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4520 of 2021 dt.04-03-2025
17. Considering the fact that the minor victim
has been consistent in her deposition and has supported the
allegation of rape and also considering the fact that the doctor
who examined the victim has found that sexual assault was
committed with the victim, I do not find a case for interference
as the prosecution as proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.
Hence, there is no infirmity in the impugned judgment of
conviction and sentence passed by the trial court.
18. For the reasons, as discussed hereinabove,
this appeal is dismissed.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
pawan/-
AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R.
CAV DATE N/A.
Uploading Date 27.03.2025
Transmission Date 27.03.2025
