[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Patna High Court

Mithun Singh vs The State Of Bihar on 3 February, 2026

Author: Shailendra Singh

Bench: Shailendra Singh

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                    CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.11 of 2014
    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1456 Year-2007 Thana- KATIHAR COMPLAINT CASE District- Katihar
======================================================
Mithun Singh S/O Bhudeo Singh Resident Of Village Kusaha, Police Station
Azamnagar, District Katihar.
                                                      ... ... Appellant/s
                               Versus
The State of Bihar
                                                        ... ... Respondent
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s        :          Ms. Kirti Kumari, (Amicus Curiae)
For the Respondent/s       :          Mr. Z.Hoda, APP.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
                     CAV JUDGMENT

Date : -02-2026

The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant

against the judgment of conviction dated 02.11.2013 and order of

sentence dated 07.11.2013 respectively passed by the court of

Learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Katihar in Sessions Trial

No. 188 of 2010 arising out of Complaint Case No. 1456 of 2007.

By the impugned judgment the appellant has been convicted for

the offence punishable under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code

(in short 'IPC'). By the impugned order of sentence he has been

sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years for

the offence punishable under Section 376 of the IPC.

2. Here it is relevant to mention that the appellant and

other two accused persons namely Bhudev Singh and Bhulia Devi

were also charged for the offences punishable under section 313 Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.11 of 2014

and 504 read with section 34 of the IPC and they were acquitted of

the said charged offences.

Prosecution story

3. The prosecution story appearing from the victim's

complaint in brief is as follows:-

As per the victim (examined as PW-4) on 28.02.2007

her father had gone outside her village to earn livelihood and her

mother had also gone to the house of her elder sister. On that day

at about 5:00 PM the accused/appellant entered into her house and

firstly inquired about her parents and when she told him that her

parents were not in the house at that time then the appellant asked

her to come to his house situated nearby the victim's house and

when she refused to accept the request of the appellant then he

(appellant) forcibly lifted her up but that act of the appellant was

resisted by her after that the appellant started assaulting her by

using fist and leg and also tied her mouth with towel and thereafter

the appellant forcibly took her in his house, at that time the other

accused, the parents of the appellant (now acquitted) were not

present, thereafter, the appellant compelled her lie on the bed and

removed her clothes and committed rape with her after making her

nude. As per the victim, after commission of the rape the appellant

asked her to flee away to her home then she started weeping and Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.11 of 2014

thereafter the other co-accused reached there who also threatened

her and made her wear her clothes and said her not to disclose the

occurrence to anyone. Thereafter, when she started coming in

weeping condition her neighbours came there and asked her about

the occurrence and on that very day her parents also returned back

to home in the night at 8:00 PM and finding her sleeping in

disturbed position asked her about the occurrence then she told

them about the occurrence. As per the victim/complainant in

respect of the occurrence her father convened a panchayat meeting

on 01.03.2007 in the evening at 4:00 PM in the village. In that

panchayat meeting the appellant participated and accepted his

wrong then the co-accused (appellant's parents) made a proposal

to marry the victim with the appellant and also sought three

months time to fulfill the said proposal that was given to the

appellant. In the meantime, she became pregnant and on 24.5.2007

the accused finding her alone in her house persuaded her to come

with them to their house and also took her on the pretext of curing

her stomach pain and gave her some medicine which caused

abortion to her. When her parents returned and saw her

deteriorating health condition then she told them about the

happening of abortion to her. After that her parents made a

complain to the accused who said to them not to worry as the Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.11 of 2014

appellant was going to marry the victim and everything would be

well but thereafter the accused broke all relations with her family

and also denied to marry her. Thereafter, on 10.06.2007 again a

panchayat meeting was convened in the evening at 3:00 PM in

which the appellant refused to marry her and thereafter at the

advice given by the panches she firstly went to the police station

where she was advised to go to the court and then she filed her

complaint.

4. The victim-(PW-4) filed her complaint before the

court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Katihar on which the learned

magistrate examined the complainant and her witnesses and took

cognizance of the alleged offences and finding the main offence to

be triable by the court of sessions committed the appellant's case

to the court of sessions.

5. The appellant stood charged for the offences under

sections 376, 313 and 504 read with section 34 of the IPC and

other accused persons stood charged for the offences under

sections 313 and 504 read with section 34 of the IPC. The

charges were read over to the appellant and co-accused and

explained to them in Hindi to which they denied and claimed to be

tried for the charged offences.

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.11 of 2014

6. Before the trial court the prosecution examined

altogether following seven witnesses:-

PW-1 X (name of this witness the victim's father has been withheld to conceal the identity of the victim) PW-2 Gulo Devi @ Dulo Devi She is said to be an eye witness of the occurrence PW-3 Y (name of this witness Mother of the victim.

has been withheld in order to conceal the identity of the victim.

      PW-4       Victim herself
      PW-5       Dr. Lakshmi Sen         Medically examined the victim.
      PW-6       Ramani Singh             A witness of panchayat meeting
      PW-7       Md. Ekramul Haque       A witness of the         panchayat
                                         meeting.

7. In addition to the ocular evidence the prosecution

proved and exhibited the following documents:-

Ext-X Thumb impression of the victim on Ekrarnama Ext-1 Signature of the appellant on the Ekrarnama identified by the victim.

      Ext-2      Medical report of the victim
      Ext-3      Agreement paper (Ekrarnama)
      Ext-4       signature of the appellant and his father on the agreement
                 paper

8. After completion of prosecution evidence the

statement of the appellant was recorded by the trial court giving

him an opportunity to explain the main incriminating

circumstances appearing against him from the prosecution's

evidences which were denied by him and he claimed himself to be Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.11 of 2014

an innocent, however, he did not take any specific defence while

recording his statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure.

9. The appellant examined three witnesses in his defence

who were, DW-1, Suresh Prasad Singh, DW-2, Amaldeo Singh,

and DW-3 Dilip Singh,

10. While convicting the appellant the trial court mainly

placed reliance upon the evidence of the victim and PW-2, in

respect of the alleged offence of rape and also placed reliance upon

Ext-3 an Ekrarnama and victim's medical examination report.

Though, the trial court acquitted the appellant and other accused

persons from the charged offences under Sections 313, 504 read

with section 34 of the IPC to the extent of victim's allegation as to

she being pregnant on account of rape committed by the appellant

and termination of the said pregnancy by the alleged act of the

accused. Learned trial court took the Exhibit-1 and purported

Ekrarnama of the appellant as being an admission of the appellant

to his guilt in respect of alleged offences in the panchayat meeting.

Submissions by learned Amicus Curiae

11. Learned Amicus Curiae has submitted that the

evidence of PW-4, the victim, is reliable and the same gets

corroboration from the evidence of PW-2 who claimed herself to Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.11 of 2014

be an eye witness of the occurrence. Further, the victim's

allegation gets corroboration from her medical examination report

to the extent of the victim becoming pregnant on account of rape

committed with her. She further submits that as the appellant's

house is situated near the house of the victim and both the houses

have same courtyard and at the time of commission of the alleged

offence of rape the victim's parents were not present in her house

so taking advantage of that situation the appellant forcibly lifted

the victim up and took her to his house and thereafter raped her. So

far as the delay in filing the complaint by the victim is concerned,

the same is not material, however, the main reasons for delay have

been explained by the victim herself. One of the main reasons for

the delay was the panchayat meetings having held in between both

the parties and false assurance given by the appellant and his

family members to marry the victim but that assurance was not

fulfilled and when the victim found herself pregnant and later her

pregnancy was forcibly terminated by the appellant and his family

members then she had to take legal action by filing her complaint

and the said circumstances are the reasons of delay in taking legal

action against the appellant. Learned Amicus Curiae further

submits that there is no illegality in the judgment of the trial court,

however, she accepts that there are serious contradictions in the Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.11 of 2014

victim's statements made by her in her complaint and her

testimony before the trial court.

Submissions on behalf of the APP

12. On the other hand learned APP submits that at the

time of commission of the alleged offences the victim was 14

years old and in this regard, medical expert's opinion is very

important. As far as the commission of rape with the victim is

concerned, the appellant himself accepted his wrong in the

panchayat meeting which was proved before the learned trial court

by the appellant's own undertaking given by him in the form of an

affidavit and there was no reason for the victim to make a false

allegation of rape against the appellant and she remained

consistent to her allegations before the trial court.

Consideration and analysis

13. I have heard learned amicus curiae and learned APP

for the State, perused the judgment impugned and the evidences

available on the record of the trial court and also taken into

account the appellant's statement.

14. In rape cases, the victim's testimony is considered to

be a crucial piece of evidence and the same may be basis of

conviction if it is credible and inspires confidence and the accused

can be convicted solely on the victim's reliable statement but in Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.11 of 2014

such case, the victim's testimony must be trustworthy and

unshakable.

15. Now, I come to the present matter. As per the

prosecution story described by the victim herself in her complaint,

at the time of commission of rape, she was alone inside her home

and her parents had gone outside the village. According to her, the

appellant finding her alone in her house entered and forcibly lifted

her up and took her in his house and during the course of taking

her, she made her resistance but she was assaulted by the appellant

by fist and legs. The narration of the incident made by the victim

in her complaint does not show an eyewitness of the alleged

occurrence in addition to the victim. According to the victim, her

parents returned back to her home in the evening on the same day

of the alleged occurrence at 8:00 P.M. and when after the

occurrence she was going to her home in weeping condition, her

neighbours also came there and inquired about the incident. In the

light of this prosecution story narrated by the victim in her

complaint, firstly, I would like to discuss the evidence of PW-2 as

she appears to be an important witness of the prosecution. The

witness is a co-villager of the appellant and victim and from her

testimony, it does not appear that she is more familiar or having

personal relation with any of the parties. The witness deposed in Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.11 of 2014

the examination-in-chief that the alleged incident took place 2½

years ago and at the time of alleged occurrence she was in her

home and upon hearing the cry, she went to the house of the

appellant and saw the appellant committing rape with the victim

and at that time the victim was nude and no cloth was on her body.

If we believe this statement then it can be deemed that the PW-2

was the single person who witnessed the alleged crime of rape but

the victim in her deposition before the trial court said nothing

about coming of this witness at the alleged place at the time of

commission of rape. Further, this witness deposed that she told the

victim's parents about the occurrence when they returned to their

home while as per the victim's parents' evidence, they got the

information of the occurrence from the victim herself when they

found her in weeping condition. The contradiction regarding the

presence of PW-2 at the time of commission of rape gives a reason

to draw the inference that the said witness was planted by the

prosecution which raises a serious doubt in the prosecution's

allegations. The victim stated in her complaint that when she was

going to her home in weeping condition after the commission of

rape, her neighbours came and asked her about the occurrence.

But none of the said neighbours, except PW-2, was produced and

examined by the prosecution even their names were not disclosed Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.11 of 2014

by the victim. On the other hand, PW-2 deposed that except her no

other person arrived at the place of occurrence. While the victim

revealed in her complaint that she herself told her parents about

the occurrence when they returned back to her home in the night at

8:00 P.M. but as per the PW-2, she informed the victim's parents

about the occurrence. The said contradiction also creates a doubt in

the prosecution story.

16. As per the evidence of victim and her parents, who

were examined as PW-1, PW-3 and PW-4, after the incident, on

01.03.2007 in the evening at 4 PM a panchayat meeting was held

by the victim's father in which the accused participated and the

appellant accepted his wrong and his parents made a proposal to

marry the victim to the appellant and sought three months time to

fulfill their promise but in the meantime the victim found herself

being pregnant and thereafter, on 24.05.2007 the accused finding

her alone at her home persuaded her to come their home and when

she went there they gave her some medicine on the pretext of

relieving her from stomach pain but the said medicine caused

abortion to her and later, a panchayat meeting was again held on

10.06.2007 by her parents in which the accused flatly refused to

marry the victim with the appellant. If we believe this story then it

would appear that two panchayat meetings took place in between Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.11 of 2014

the appellant's family and the victim's family first, on 01.03.2007

and second, on 10.06.2007. As per the evidence of PW- 1, PW-3

and PW-4 (victim's parents and victim herself) in the said

panchayat meeting the appellant accepted his wrong and he

assured the victim and her family to marry the victim and in this

regard, gave his written undertaking also. The prosecution brought

the said undertaking on the record and got it exhibited as Exhibit-3

to prove the factum of panchayat meetings as well as the

appellant's acceptance of his wrong and giving his own

undertaking to marry the victim. From perusal of Exhibit-3, it

appears that the said document contains signatures and thumb

impression of several persons including the appellant, his father

and others who are said to have participated in the panchayat

meeting in the capacity of panches. The Exhibit-3 was prepared

on a non judicial stamp paper and the same was attested by the

Notary Public as appears from its perusal. But the attestation made

by the Notary Public shows that the Exhibit-3 was attested on

08.01.2008 and signature of one panch was made with date and

the same reveals the date of creation of so-called Ekrarnama by the

appellant on 08.01.2008 while as per the prosecution story, the said

panchayat meetings were held on 01.03.2007 and 10.06.2007.

Thus, exhibit-3 was prepared several months after the so-claimed Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.11 of 2014

panchayat meetings and prepared even after filing of the

complaint. As the victim had lodged her case against the appellant

and his parents, so, why the appellant and his father proceeded to

give the said undertaking after the institution of the complaint case

and in this regard, there is no proper explanation by the

prosecution which goes against the reliability of said undertaking

and victim's story and her allegations.

17. The learned trial court relied upon Exhibit-1 and

Exhibit-3 as being an admission of the appellant to the wrong

allegedly committed by him with the victim.

18. In the light of above discussed facts, I am of the

opinion that the said approach of the trial court was not proper as

firstly in the Exhibit-1 and Exhibit- 3 the appellant simply

accepted a wrong having been committed by him but did not

accept the commission of rape by him with the victim and the

same does not come in the purview of extra judicial confession of

the appellant. Moreover, PW-6 and PW-7 who made their

signatures upon Exhibit-1 and Exhibit- 3 as witnesses were

produced by the prosecution to prove the exhibits and their

contents. But both the witnesses said nothing about the said

admission of the appellant to the commission of rape by him with

the victim. On the other hand, they revealed in their evidence that Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.11 of 2014

5-6 months back a panchayat meeting was held in between the

family members of both the parties in which the appellant became

agree to marry the victim. Further, PW-6 stated in the cross-

examination that the case was filed when the appellant did not

become ready to marry the victim. The victim's father accepted in

his evidence that he had a talk with the appellant in regard to the

marriage of victim with him before the occurrence but the

appellant was not agree for the same.

19. The appellant has taken the defence that victim's

parents wanted to marry the victim with him and when they did

not succeed they lodged the complaint case with a false story. In

support of this defense, three witnesses were examined by the

appellant who supported the defence of the appellant.

20. In view of the contents of the Ext.-3 as well as in the

light of the evidence of victim's father, this Court finds no reason

to disbelieve the appellant's said defence. As per the evidence of

victim, PW-4, there is a common courtyard in between her house

and the appellant's house where 8-9 persons oftenly remain. As per

the allegation the appellant entered into the house of the victim and

forcibly lifted her up and succeeded in taking her into his house

despite victim's strong resistance. But it is not believable that

without notice of anyone the appellant could have succeeded in Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.11 of 2014

committing such alleged wrong. Though, PW-2 claimed herself to

have come at the house of appellant upon hearing victim's cry and

saw the victim in naked condition but for the reasons discussed

above, her evidence is not reliable as the same does not get support

from the victim's own evidence, this circumstance also creates a

doubt in the prosecution's allegation.

21. As per the medical expert's evidence, who was

examined as PW-5, the victim's pregnancy had been terminated

twenty days before her examination. The victim was examined by

the medical expert on 12.06.2007. Though the medical evidence

goes in favour of the prosecution story to some extent but the

prosecution did not succeed before the trial court to prove the

victim's said pregnancy as being result of the sexual assault

allegedly committed by the appellant with her on 28.02.2007.

Furthermore, the charge for the offence under Section 313 of IPC

framed upon the appellant was disbelieved by the trial court and

he was acquitted of the said charged offence.

Conclusion

22. For the reasons mentioned above, I find some strong

circumstances discussed above going against the allegations

levelled by the victim against the appellant and the victim does not

appear to be sterling witness and her evidence does not get

corroboration from the evidences of other witnesses. The appellant's Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.11 of 2014

conviction for the offence under Section 376 of IPC is not sustainable

on the victim's sole testimony and her evidence does not appear to be

trustworthy and not inspire confidence of this Court. Accordingly, the

trial court's judgement dated 02.11.2013 convicting the appellant for

the offence punishable under section 376 of the IPC and the order

dated 07.11.2013 sentencing the appellant for the said charged

offence which have been impugned in this appeal are hereby set aside

and the appeal stands allowed.

23. The appellant is presently on bail, accordingly, his bail

bonds stand cancelled forthwith and he as well as his sureties are

hereby discharged from their respective liabilities.

24. Ms. Kirti Kumari, learned Amicus Curiae shall be

entitled to remuneration, as per notification dated 18.05.2017 issued

by the State Government, to be paid by the Patna High Court Legal

Services Committee for assisting this Court as Amicus Curiae.

25. Let the records of the trial court along with the copy of

this judgement be sent forthwith to the trial court for compliance and

doing needful.

siddharthkr/BKS                                         (Shailendra Singh, J)
AFR/NAFR               AFR
CAV DATE               20.01.2026
Uploading Date         03.02.2026
Transmission Date      03.02.2026