Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 18, Cited by 0]

Patna High Court

Munna Singh vs The State Of Bihar on 17 August, 2023

Author: Nawneet Kumar Pandey

Bench: Chakradhari Sharan Singh, Nawneet Kumar Pandey

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                    CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No.274 of 2021
      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2017 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Buxar
======================================================
MUNNA SINGH Son of Late Brij Bihari Mahto, Resident of Village -
Bharauli, P.S.- Nawanagar, District - Buxar.

                                                                  ... ... Appellant/s

                                       Versus
The State of Bihar.

                                          ... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s      :       Mr.Sumeet Kumar Singh, Adv.
                                 Mr. Nikhil Singh, Adv.
                                 Mr. Binod Kumar Singh, Adv.
                                 Mrs. Alka Singh, Adv.
For the State            :       Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha, APP
For the Informant        :       Mr. Navneet Govindam, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN
SINGH
        and
        HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR
PANDEY
                    CAV JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY)

 Date : 17-08-2023

              This appeal has been preferred under Section 374 (2)

 and 389 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for setting

 aside the judgment dated 04.02.2021 and the order of sentence

 dated 08.02.2021 passed by the learned Additional District

 Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge, POCSO Act, Buxar in POCSO

 Case No. 13 of 2017, CIS No. 5 of 2017, arising out of Buxar

 (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 21 of 2017, whereby the appellant has

 been convicted and sentenced as under:-
 Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.274 of 2021 dt.17-08-2023
                                           2/14




          Conviction                                   Sentence
          under Section       Imprisonment         Fine (Rs.)     In default of
                                                                  fine
          376 of the IPC      RI for 10 years 10,000/-            SI for six
                                                                  months
          4 of the POCSO RI for 10 years 20,000/-                 SI for six
          Act                                                     months
          6 of the POCSO RI for 15 years 20,000/-                 SI for six
          Act                                                     months


                      2. The victim is a child of 5 years of age. As per

         allegation, the appellant has committed rape upon her. We do

         not quote the name of the victim to avoid her identity in public

         domain. For the sake of convenience, the victim, hereinafter, is

         referred as 'X'.

                      3. Asha Devi, PW 4 is mother of the victim, on whose

         statement, (Fardbeyan), Buxar (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 21 of

         2017 was registered under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code

         and Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012. As per her statement

         recorded on 21.05.2017, she with her husband and two

         daughters, aged about 3 years and 5 years (the victim) had gone

         to her Maike on the occasion of marriage of her younger sister.

         The ill-fated day (18.05.2017) was the day of marriage of her

         younger sister. In the house, there was a ceremonious ambiance.

         The female inmates of the house were engaged in ritual of the

         marriage. At the occasion of Lawa ceremony (a ceremony

         performed at the occasion of marriage in the locality in which
 Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.274 of 2021 dt.17-08-2023
                                           3/14




         the female members of the house goes out to the Bhansar for

         roasting paddy), the female inmates of the house had gone to

         Bhansar. PW 4 did not go to attend the Lawa ceremony, as she

         was feeling abdominal pain. She was taking rest in her house.

         She assumed that the X was also with the female members, who

         had gone at the Lawa ceremony. When the female members

         returned, PW 4 did not notice her daughter X with them.

         Then the family members started                 searching the victim and

         they found her in the tent, which was erected for the ceremony.

         She was lying there in a pool of blood, her Lehanga was wet in

         blood and her condition was serious. She was writhing in pain

         and was respirating with trouble. On asking of PW 4, she stated

         that Munna Bhaiya (the appellant) had asked her that her mother

         was calling her to the temple, where she was performing

         worship. The victim went with the appellant, who brought her in

         a bush situated besides the tent and committed rape upon her

         and after threatening the victim not to disclose the occurrence to

         anybody, he brought her again in tent and after leaving her in

         tent, he fled away. The victim was not in a position to move, as

         she was serious. The family members immediately brought her

         to hospital, where she was treated. It has been mentioned further

         that during course of the treatment, two stitches were done at
 Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.274 of 2021 dt.17-08-2023
                                           4/14




         her private part. When the condition of the victim improved,

         PW 4 lodged the FIR in the Mahila police station. Due to

         unawareness of legal implication, the informant had washed the

         Lehanga, which the victim was wearing at the time of rape.

                         4. On the basis of Fardbeyan of PW 4, Mahila P.S.

         Case No. 21 of 2017 was registered for the offences punishable

         under the sections noted-above. The investigating authorities

         submitted charge-sheet No.31 of 2017 on 31.05.2017 against the

         appellant under Section 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code and

         clause (i) of Section 376 (2) was in existence at the time of the

         occurrence, but was subsequently omitted by Section 4 of the

         Amendment Act, 22 of 2018 with effect from 21.04.2018 and its

         place, a new sub-section 3 was added by the same amending

         Act, which read as "whoever, commits rape on a woman under

         sixteen years of age shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment

         for a term which shall not be less than twenty years, but which may

         extent to imprisonment for life, which shall mean imprisonment for

         the remainder of that person's natural life, and shall also be liable to

         fine: Provided that such fine shall be just and reasonable to meet

         medical expenses and rehabilitation of the victim: Provided further

         that any fine imposed under this sub-section shall be paid to the

         victim" and Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012. During course of

         investigation, the statement of X was also recorded under
 Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.274 of 2021 dt.17-08-2023
                                           5/14




         Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., which is exhibit-4.

                      5. Vide order dated 19.06.2017, the learned Special

         Court, POCSO had taken cognizance under Section 4 of the

         POCSO Act. After complying the requirements under Section

         207 of the Cr.PC, the case was committed to the court of

         Sessions. On 14.08.2017 the charges were framed under Section

         376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the POCSO Act,

         which were read over and explained to the appellant, to which

         he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution

         examined nine witnesses, including the victim, the doctors and

         the Investigating Officers.

                         6. PW 4 is the informant Asha Devi, mother of the

         victim. In her deposition, she has reiterated her earlier version

         and stated that on the occasion of the marriage of her younger

         sister, she went to her Maike with her two daughters. On the day

         of marriage, she was feeling pain in her abdomen and she was

         taking rest. The family members of the house went out for Lawa

         ceremony. They returned, but X was not with them, on search

         the victim was found in the tent in a pool of blood. The blood

         was oozing from her private part, her condition was serious and

         she was writhing in pain. On asking the X disclosed that Munna

         Bhaiya (the appellant) at the pretext that her mother was calling
 Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.274 of 2021 dt.17-08-2023
                                           6/14




         her, brought her in the bush and committed rape upon her. The

         appellant allured her to give toffee and biscuit and also

         threatened her to kill, had she not obeyed his command.

         Thereafter, this witness along with her husband brought the

         victim to police station and lodged the case.

                         7. PW 3 is father of the victim. He has stated that

         on ill-fated day at 9:30 P.M., his daughter was found in a pool of

         blood in the tent, her condition was serious and blood was

         oozing from her private part. This witnesses has stated further

         that on query, the victim apprised him that the appellant asked

         her that her mother was searching her in temple, on that pretext,

         he committed rape upon the victim. This witness identified his

         signature on the Fardbeyan,which has been marked as exhibit-2.

                         8. PW 2 is the victim herself. While recording the

         deposition of this witness, the learned trial court has assessed

         her age as seven years, as mentioned in the column of the

         deposition form. Before jotting down the deposition of this

         witness, the learned trial court put some questions to her to

         ascertain whether she (the victim) was able to give evidence or

         not? The learned trial court has mentioned while taking

         deposition of the victim that she was able to give evidence. The

         victim has stated that the appellant, at the pretext of providing
 Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.274 of 2021 dt.17-08-2023
                                           7/14




         her biscuits and mixtures, brought her in the bush and he

         inserted his penis into her vagina and due to that blood was

         oozing from her private part. She has stated further that when

         the blood was oozing, her mother brought her to Buxar Hospital

         and thereafter, she came to the house with her mother. The

         victim identified the appellant, who was present in the court.

                         9. PW 5 is brother of PW-4. He has stated that it

         was the occasion of marriage ceremony of the sister of this

         witness, in which the family members of the victim had

         participated. This witness has also supported the prosecution's

         case and has stated that on search, the victim was found in

         injured condition. The blood was oozing from her private part.

         The victim had stated that it was Munna Bhaiya, (the appellant),

         who committed rape upon her after bringing her into the bush.

         The signature of this witness on Fardbeyan has been marked as

         exhibit-2/B. He has stated that at the time of occurrence, the

         victim was five years old.

                         10. PW 6 is uncle of PW 4. He has also deposed in

         the similar words as PW 5.

                         11. PW 1 is Dr. Madhu Singh, who is a member of

         Medical Board, which examined the victim. She has stated that

         on 21.05.2017 she examined the X and found as follows:-
 Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.274 of 2021 dt.17-08-2023
                                           8/14




                            "Intra Keth is seen in her left hand. On private

                            parts examination- two stichers are seen on

                            perinium and lower part of latria minora hymen

                            poorly visualised due to stichers. Vaginal swab

                            taken. Vaginal swab examination report given by

                            Dr. B.N. Chaubey. No spermatozoa found dead

                            or alive on low and high power of microscopic

                            examination- A few ephithelial cells are seen.

                            Dental examination report given by Dr. Ritesh

                            Kumar Singh total no. Of teeth 20 all are

                            dessiduous no permanent teeth are seen.

                            MI- A small mole on upper part of chest.

                            Regarding age X-ray report is awaiting.

                            Opinion:- Injury in private part.

                            This report is in my pen and bears by signature

                            which is marked as Exhibit 1. Apart from the Dr.

                            Namita Singh, Dr. B.N. Chaudhary, Dr. R.K.

                            Singh have also put their signature which I

                            identify the same is marked as Exhibit l/a to l/c."

                              The medical report is exhibit-2.

                         12. PW-7 is Dr. Yogendra Kumar, who is also

         member of the Medical Board, which examined the victim. This
 Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.274 of 2021 dt.17-08-2023
                                           9/14




         witness identified his signature on medical examination report

         and the X-ray report, which is marked as Exhibit-1/D.

                         13. PW-8 is Investigating Officer, Mr. Ramesh

         Ram (Retired Sub-Inspector). He has identified his signature on

         formal FIR (exhibit-3). This witness visited the place of

         occurrence, got the statement of the victim recorded under

         Section 164 of the CrPC and after completion of the

         investigation, submitted charge sheet No. 31 of 2017 on

         31.05.2017.

                         14

. PW-9 is the Judicial Magistrate, who recorded the statement of the victim under Section 164 of the Cr.PC, which is exhibit-4. He has stated that he recorded the statement of the victim in his/her chamber in the presence of her mother.

15. The prosecution has also adduced the following documentary evidences in support of the charges made against the appellant, which are as follows:-

Exhibit-1 - Injury report of victim Exhibit -1/A to Exhibit-1/C- Signatures of doctors on Injury Report Exhibit-2 - Signature of Brajesh Singh @ Brajeshwar Singh on Fardbeyan Exhibit- 1/D- Signature and report of Dr. Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.274 of 2021 dt.17-08-2023 10/14 Yogendra Kumar on injury report.
Exhibit-3 - Formal FIR Exhibit-4 - Statement of 164 of Cr.P.C.

16. The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that there are some material contradictions in the depositions of the witnesses, which make the prosecution case doubtful. He has submitted further that the victim, in her statement under Section 164 of the Cr.PC, has stated that the appellant had raped her and inserted his finger in her private part, but in her deposition, this thing is missing. He has also submitted that somewhere in the deposition of the witnesses it has come that the appellant brought the victim behind the bush after giving allurement to give her toffee and biscuits, but on other occasions the witnesses, including the victim, have stated that the accused had brought her in the bush, at the pretext that her mother was calling her in temple.

17. The second submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that as there are some doubts on the commission of the offence, as such, the statutory presumption under Sections 29 and 30 of the POCSO Act are not attracted in the present case.

18. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.274 of 2021 dt.17-08-2023 11/14 Prosecutor for the State has submitted that the victim is a minor child of five years of age. The prosecution has proved that the appellant had committed rape in most barbaric and heinous manner on a child of five years of age and there is nothing on the record, which shows that it was a case of false implication of the appellant.

19. We have carefully perused the records of the learned trial court with the evidences and heard the rival arguments of the appellant and the State. It is not in much controversy that the victim is a child defined in Section 2 (1) (d) of the POCSO Act. The medical evidence as well as the statement of the witnesses establishes beyond all the shadows of reasonable doubts that the victim, who is a child, was subjected to rape.

20. So far as, the contradictions crept in the depositions of the victim as well as the other witnesses are concerned, in our opinion, it do not render the prosecution's case incredible or untrustworthy. The victim is a child of five years of age. She, in her own words and way, depicted the entire occurrence that took place with her. The factum of rape committed by the appellant has vividly been described by this witness in her statement recorded in the court as well as under

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.274 of 2021 dt.17-08-2023 12/14 Section 164 of the Cr.PC, corroborated by the medical evidence. Two stitches were given to stop the bleeding at her private part. Her deposition was corroborated by the other witnesses, e.g. her mother, father, maternal uncle and maternal grandfather. We do find any reason to discredit the victim and the witnesses. There is nothing, which shows the motive for false implication of the appellant in this case. On the basis of above-mentioned observations, we do not find any reason to interfere with the conviction of the appellant under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

21. We are of the opinion that the learned court below has rightly convicted the appellant under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and awarded the sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand rupees only) and in default of payment of fine, he would undergo further six months of simple imprisonment.

22. So far as the sentence inflicted on the appellant under Sections 6 and 4 of the POCSO Act is concerned that should not be inflicted on him for two reasons:- (i) The charges were not framed under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and (ii) Section 42 of the POCSO Act provides as follows:-

"Alternate punishment. - Where an act or omission constitutes an offence punishable Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.274 of 2021 dt.17-08-2023 13/14 under this Act and also under sections 166A, 354A, 354B, 354C, 354D, 370, 370A, 375, 376, [376A, 376AB, 376B, 376C, 376D, 376DA, 376DB,] [376E, section 509 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) or section 67B of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000), then, notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, the offender found guilty of such offence shall be liable to punishment under this Act or under the Indian Penal Code as provides for punishment which is greater in degree."

23. From bare perusal of Section 42 of the POCSO Act, it appears that if an accused is found guilty for commission of the offence under the provisions of POCSO Act and also under the provisions of Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, he shall be liable to be punished under the POCSO Act or the Indian Penal Code, which provides punishment which is greater in degree. Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code is greater in degree because one of the punishments under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code is "imprisonment for life, which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person's natural life", whereas under Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act though life imprisonment has been provided as the punishment for penetrative sexual assault (as on the date of commission of the offence), but that is for the simple imprisonment for life and not Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.274 of 2021 dt.17-08-2023 14/14 for the remainder of natural life of the accused, as such, in our view, only the sentence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code should be awarded to the appellant.

24. Accordingly, while upholding the appellant's conviction for the offences punishable under section 376 and section 4 of the POCSO Act as recorded by the trial court, the sentence is modified to rigorous imprisonment for ten years with fine as imposed by the trial court for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the IPC. No separate sentence is required to be imposed for the proved offence under section 4 of the POCSO Act. Remaining part of the impugned judgment and order doesn't require interference.

25. With the amendments in sentence indicated above, the appeal is allowed in-part.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) I agree Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) Kundan/Mahesh AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE 25.07.2023 Uploading Date 18.08.2023 Transmission Date 18.08.2023