Judgment:
1. We have not preferred to name the victim in this judgment in view of the amended Section 228A of the Indian Penal Code read with the decision of the Supreme Court in State of Karnataka v. Pattu Raja : 2004 (1) S.C.C. page 475 and hereafter refer her as the victim or the victim girl.
2. The appellants were charged for committing rape on the victim girl and were tried and found guilty under Section 376(2)(g). They have been convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a line of Rs. 5,000/- each and in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. The appellant, Pradip Gope, has been also convicted under Section 341 of the Indian Penal Code but there is no order of separate sentence for the same.
3. The case of the prosecution in short was that the victim girl, who happened to be a maid servant, was returning home after attending here work on 21.02.1995 was forcibly dragged, ravished and raped by eight accused persons.
4. The allegation is that the appellant Pradip Gope met with her on the way and asked her to accompany him on the plea that he would introduce and arrange more domestic work in the neighborhood. On her denial to the proposal she was forcibly overpowered and dragged by Pradip Gope and was brought to a lonely place near the Shiv Mandir where she was assaulted by fists and slaps. She was gagged by them, pushed on the ground and raped by the boys including the appellant, one after the other. Thereafter all fled away. The victim remained lying unconscious for the whole night. The inmates of her house on search found her lying there on the next day. As she was unable to walk due to injuries they helped her and brought to Gua hospital where she was treated.
5. The police drew a formal F.I.R. on the basis of the Fardbeyan of the victim girl, recorded in the female ward of the Hospital. A case was registered under Section 341, 323, 376/34 of the Indian Penal Code on 22.2.1998 at 13.30 hours.
6. The police thereafter, took up investigation. The victim was medically examined. The appellants were arrested and are said to have made their confessional statement.
7. On completion of the investigation the police submitted charge-sheet against the appellants and others under Section 341, 323, 376 of the Indian Penal Code.
8. Cognizance of the said offence was taken against the appellants. The case was committed to the court of Sessions.
9. Charges were framed Under Section 341, 323, 376(2)(g) I.P.C against the appellants.
10. The appellants pleased not guilty and claimed to be tried.
11. Altogether four prosecution witnesses were examined to prove the charges. It is relevant to mention that as the victim girl was raped at a lonely place there was no other eye witness to the occurrence.
12. P.W.-I, Lata Karwa, is the Aunt of the victim girl. She has deposed that on search the victim girl was found the next day on the place of occurrence sexually ravished and severely injured. She was unable to walk. This witness had helped her to bring back home. Thereafter the victim girl was admitted in female ward of Gua Hospital. She has specifically stated that the victim girl was lying naked at the ground at the lonely place near the Shiv Mandir. She has stated that the victim girl had described the occurrence to her as to how she was overpowered and gang raped by 4-5 boys. She has supported the prosecution case in clear version. There is nothing in her cross-examination to discredit her testimony.
13. The victim has been examined as P.W.-2. On going through her deposition we find that she has given the vivid account of the occurrence and has fully supported the prosecution case. She has identified the appellant, Pradip Gope in the court, but on seeing the accused Budhram Sinku, Samial Purty and Ashish @ Tipu Balmuchu she clearly stated that those three persons were not the participants in commission of rape. She had also identified the accused Nelson Bhuiya and Motal Gundua and stated that they had also ravished her and committed rape on her. She has further stated that after that occurrence she became unconscious and remained lying at the lonely place for the whole night and on the next morning Lata Karwa her Aunt with the help of Aloma Kumari brought her home and thereafter admitted her to Gua Hospital, where the police had recorded her Fardbeyan. She has stated that the contents of the Fardbeyan were read over to her and she had put her signature (Ext-1). She had also stated that due to holiday on that day people were confined to their houses and inspite of alarm raised by her nobody could notice her alarm and did not come for rescue. About the place of occurrence she has stated that it was a lonely place with the bushes of 'Putush' all around. She was pushed on the rough and stony ground due to which she has also sustained abrasion and injuries on her back portion of body.
14. P.W.-3 is the Lady Doctor. She had medically examined the victim girl. According to the doctor, the age of the girl was 16 to 17 years. On examination of the private parts of the victim girl she found the same tender. She had also taken vaginal swab and sent the same for Pathological examination. The report revealed presence of few dead spermatozoa, Pus Cells, Bacteria and epithelial cells in the vaginal swab. She found abrasion on her back, bruise on right breast below the nipple and three penetrating wounds over dorsum of right wrist. There was also an X-ray examination in which Epiphysis of elice crest was found not fused. Epiphysis of lower end of radius and ulna were not found fused. She has deposed that as per the Clinical, Radiological and Pathological examination she found that the girl was subjected to sexual intercourse. The Medical Examination Report has been proved by her and marked as (Ext.-2). The age of the injuries corroborated the prosecution version.
15. P.W.-4 is the (I.O.) Investigating Officer. He has stated that on receiving O/D slip he came to learn about the gang rape committed on a girl and that she has been admitted in Gua Hospital. He entered the same in the Station Diary and proceeded to the hospital. In the hospital he found the victim girl admitted with injuries. He recorded the Fardbeyan of the victim girl on which she put her L.T.I.. He also recorded the statement of Lata Karwa (P.W.-1) who was there in the hospital attending the victim girl. In course of investigation he visited the place of occurrence and found the place surrounded by bushes of 'Putush'. It was near a Shiv temple in the vicinity of the Aerodrome. He found the place lonely. He recorded the statement of the witnesses and on that basis arrested some of the accused. Some other accused had already surrendered. On completion of investigation he submitted the charge-sheet against the accused person. He has also proved some documents.
16. On the appraisal of the said evidences, we find that the victim girl has fully corroborated her statement made in the Fardbeyan, identified the persons who had ravished and committed rape on her. She has taken proper caution in identifying the miscreants although some other accused persons were also arrested and made accused in the case. She has distinctly identified the accused persons who had committed rape.
17. Since there was no other eye witness as the rape was committed on her at a lonely place, we have read the evidence of the victim girl with due care and caution. We find that there is no contradiction in the statement made by her and she has fully supported and proved her version made in the Fardbeyan. There is nothing in the cross examination to discredit her testimony. We further find that P.W.-I, has also fully corroborated the part expected of her. The evidence of the doctor and the Investigating Officer also fully corroborated and support the prosecution case.
18. Learned Trial Court being conscious of the fact that in the facts and circumstance of the case he has to rely on the solitary witness, has meticulously examined and discussed the evidence of the victim girl as well as the testimony of other witnesses, ocular and medical and has held the appellants guilty of the charge of committing rape on the victim girl.
19. In this appeal the appellants have taken the following grounds:
i) That the Investigating Officer has not properly explained as to how he could know about the occurrence and how he could reach to the victim girl who was admitted in hospital and that his statement is not supportive and is not worthy of reliance.
ii) The victim girl is said to be admitted in Gua Hospital but she was not medically examined by the doctor of that hospital rather she was subsequently sent for her medical examination to Sadar Hospital, Chaibasa. The said non-examination of the victim girl medically at Gua Hospital raises a doubt and benefit thereof must be given to the accused-appellant.
iii) The victim girl was admitted straightway to the hospital before approaching the police station. Normally in case of such occurrence the victim runs to the police and the police after recording the statement refers the victim for medical examination in accordance with the provisions made under Section 53 of the Cr.P.C. Avoiding the police station and directly admitting the victim in the Gua Hospital also gives rise to serious doubt in the credibility of prosecution version. Learned court below should have given the benefit of those doubts to the accused persons and should have acquitted them.
20. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submitted that inspite of the said lacunae in the case, the appellants have been erroneously convicted and sentenced severely by the learned court below.
21. Learned A.P.P. on the other hand submitted that the victim girl was medically examined by the lady doctor at Sadar hospital. It is not on record whether any lady doctor was available in the Gua hospital. However, her examination either at Gua Hospital or at Sadar Hospital, Chaibasa does not make any difference so far the merit of the case is concerned.
22. He further submitted that since the victim was severely injured and she was unable to walk, family members had rightly taken her to hospital for treatment as that was more urgently required. The police came to know about the said occurrence after receiving the O/D slip at the police station and immediately thereafter arrived at the hospital and recorded the Fardbeyan of the victim girl.
23. He urged that there are some contradictions but the same are not vital and fatal. The evidence of the Investigating Officer and the doctor fully corroborated and supported the prosecution case. The victim girl has also fully proved the incidence and her statement made in the Fardbeyan.
24. It has further been submitted that the appellants are guilty of committing heinous crime which is not the crime against the individual but the same is against the society and the provisions for dealing with such crime has been made stringent by bringing necessary amendments in the penal law.
25. Having heard the learned Counsel and considering their submissions, the facts and evidences on record, we find much substance in the submissions made by the learned A.P.P. In the instant case since there was no other eye witness available at the place of occurrence we find no contradiction in the statement. The victim girl has fully proved the occurrence and the other evidences on record also corroborate with cogent force. We find no infirmity in the judgment and the record of the learned court below. Since the legislatures have made certain amendments in the penal law regarding the offences of rape and ravishment of female to curb such offences with iron hand we find the order of sentence justified. We find no ground made out to interfere with the impugned judgment.
This appeal is accordingly dismissed.