Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 35 views

    Arun Kumar Mahatha VS State of Bihar PDF

    Uploaded by

    M. NAGA SHYAM KIRAN
    This document summarizes a court case from the High Court of Jharkhand in India from 2006. [1] The appellant, Arun Kumar Mahatha, was convicted of rape and sentenced to 7 years in prison. [2] However, the court found issues with the evidence and testimony presented. Key witnesses like the victim's mother and uncle did not fully corroborate the victim's story. [3] Additionally, the medical examination found the victim's hymen intact with no injuries, contradicting the rape allegation. Therefore, the high court set aside the conviction, giving the appellant benefit of doubt.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Arun Kumar Mahatha VS State of Bihar PDF

    Uploaded by

    M. NAGA SHYAM KIRAN
    35 views3 pages
    This document summarizes a court case from the High Court of Jharkhand in India from 2006. [1] The appellant, Arun Kumar Mahatha, was convicted of rape and sentenced to 7 years in prison. [2] However, the court found issues with the evidence and testimony presented. Key witnesses like the victim's mother and uncle did not fully corroborate the victim's story. [3] Additionally, the medical examination found the victim's hymen intact with no injuries, contradicting the rape allegation. Therefore, the high court set aside the conviction, giving the appellant benefit of doubt.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    ARUN_KUMAR_MAHATHA_VS_STATE_OF_BIHAR.pdf

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes a court case from the High Court of Jharkhand in India from 2006. [1] The appellant, Arun Kumar Mahatha, was convicted of rape and sentenced to 7 years in prison. [2] However, the court found issues with the evidence and testimony presented. Key witnesses like the victim's mother and uncle did not fully corroborate the victim's story. [3] Additionally, the medical examination found the victim's hymen intact with no injuries, contradicting the rape allegation. Therefore, the high court set aside the conviction, giving the appellant benefit of doubt.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    35 views3 pages

    Arun Kumar Mahatha VS State of Bihar PDF

    Uploaded by

    M. NAGA SHYAM KIRAN
    This document summarizes a court case from the High Court of Jharkhand in India from 2006. [1] The appellant, Arun Kumar Mahatha, was convicted of rape and sentenced to 7 years in prison. [2] However, the court found issues with the evidence and testimony presented. Key witnesses like the victim's mother and uncle did not fully corroborate the victim's story. [3] Additionally, the medical examination found the victim's hymen intact with no injuries, contradicting the rape allegation. Therefore, the high court set aside the conviction, giving the appellant benefit of doubt.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 3

    2020-03-16 Page 1

    This Product is Licensed to M.NAGASHYAM KIRAN, ADVOCATE, ANANTAPURAMU


    2006 0 Supreme(Jhk) 779
    2006 3 AIR(jhar)(R) 461; 2007 0 CrLJ 447; 2006 4 JCR 344

    High Court Of Jharkhand


    Judgename : R. R. PRASAD, J.
    ARUN KUMAR MAHATHA - Appellant
    Versus
    STATE OF BIHAR - Respondents
    Cri. Appeal 282 Of 1999
    Decided On : 07/03/2006
    INDIAN PENAL CODE : S.376

    Advocates Appeared :
    B.M.TRIPATHY, MANOJ KUMAR

    Judgment :
    ( 1 ) THE sole appellant, Arun kumar Mahatha was put on trial for the charges that he by entering
    into the house of the informant, Madhuri Kumari (P. W. 4)committed rape on her. Learned Sessions
    judge having found the appellant guilty convicted him under Sections 376 and 448 of the Indian Penal
    Code and consequently sentenced him to undergo R. I. for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- under
    Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and in default to undergo R. I. for further period of 15 days. No
    separate sentence was Imposed under section 448 of the Indian Penal Code.
    ( 2 ) THE case of the prosecution is that on 24-1-1996 one Madhurl Kumari, daughter of Arun Bourl
    (P. W. 5) while she was alone in her house the appellant entered into her house at 12 noon and asked
    her to have sex with him, to which she denied and upon it the appellant put her down on the ground and
    tore her underpant and forcibly committed rape on her by gagging her mouth with gamachha and in that
    course when she tried to resist, the appellant assaulted her with danda.
    ( 3 ) THE said Madhuri Kumari gave her fardbeyan (Ext. 6) on 24-6-96 at 5:15 p. m. Upon it the
    case was registered and the matter was taken up for investigation.
    ( 4 ) DURING Investigation, Madhuri Kumari was forwarded for medical examination before dr. Mrs.
    Lila Rani (P. W. 1), who on examining, assessed her age as 14 years and did find hymen intact. She
    also noticed that no injury was there over the cheek and face, nor did she find any spermatozoa in
    vaginal swab and accordingly she Issued a report, which has been marked as Ext. 2.
    ( 5 ) AFTER completion of the investigation, the police submitted charge-sheet. Accordingly the
    cognizance of the offences was taken and in due course when the case was committed to the Court of
    Session the charges were framed, to which the appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
    2020-03-16 Page 2

    ( 6 ) IN this case, the prosecution examined as many as 9 witnesses. Out of them P. W. 1, Lila Rani
    is the doctor, P. W. 4, Madhuri kumari is the prosecutrix whereas P. W. 5, arun Bouri is the father of the
    victim girl, p. W. 6, Lata Devi is the aunt of the victim and P. W. 7, Khuti Boutin is the mother of the
    informant, all are hearsay witnesses. P. W. 2, Prahlad Bouri happens to be the uncle of the informant.
    ( 7 ) AFTER the prosecution case was closed the appellant, were questioned under section 313 Cr.
    P. C. about the incriminating evidences brought on. The record, to which he denied.
    ( 8 ) THE case of the defence, as appears from the suggestion given to the witnesses, is that father
    of the appellant had a shop and there was some dues against the family members of the victim and on
    the day of occurrence when the appellant came across with the informant he asked the informant as to
    why the dues are not being paid, upon it victim told him that the appellant has also taken away fish out of
    the pond forcibly and started altercation with her and upon it the appellant assaulted the informant with
    lathi.
    ( 9 ) THE learned trial Court having found the appellant guilty convicted and sentenced the appellant
    as aforesaid,
    ( 10 ) LEARNED counsel appearing for the appellant submits that it is the case of the appellant from
    the beginning that on account of the fact that some money was due to be paid by the family members of
    the informant and when he asked it from the informant, an altercation ensued and in that course the
    informant abused him. but the informant in order to make entire occurrence graver a false statement was
    given that she has been raped and these facts would be evident from the evidence of none other than
    the mother, khuti Bourin (P. W. 7) of the informant as well as uncle, Prahlad Bouri (P. W. 2) and that
    apart the doctor (P. W. 1) has also not found any sign of rape upon the victim.
    ( 11 ) HEARD learned counsel for the State. Having heard counsel for the parties and on perusal of
    the record, I do find that it is the case of the prosecution as has been made out in the Fardbeyan (Ext.
    G) that while madhuri Kumari the informant (P. W. 4) was in her house alone the appellant entered into
    the house and committed rape and then assaulted her with lathi.
    ( 12 ) THE informant, in her evidence, though had supported the case as has been given in the F. I.
    R. , but there has been no corroboration by any of the witnesses, namely, P. W. 3; P. W. 5; P. W. 6. who
    claimed to be the hearsay witnesses. Though all those witnesses, namely, P. W. 3; P. W. 5 and p. W. 6
    have deposed that they were told about the occurrence by P. W. 4, but P. W. 4, in her evidence, never
    said that she told about the occurrence to either P. W. 3; P. W. 5 and P. W. 6. Moreover, the testimony
    of P. W. 4 does not get corroboration from his uncle prahlad Bouri ( P. W. 2), who has only stated that
    he saw the appellant assaulting the informant and furthermore P. W. 7, who happens to be none other
    than the mother of the informant had deposed that occurrence of only assault had taken place. In this
    background of the testimonies of P. W. 2 and P. W. 7, if the medical evidence is looked at, the testimony
    ol KW. 4 certainly gets falsified as P. W. 1, has categorically deposed that hymen was found intact and
    she did not have any injury either on face or vulva.
    ( 13 ) KEEPING in view this aspect of the matter if the case of the defence which appears to be
    quite probable is taken into consideration the testimony of P. W. 4 that she was raped by the appellant is
    shrouded with doubt and hence trial Court committed illegality in convicting and sentencing the
    appellant.
    ( 14 ) IN the facts and circumstances as stated above, the appellant certainly deserves benefit of
    doubt. Accordingly, the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge is set
    2020-03-16 Page 3

    aside. Consequently, this appeal stands allowed. Appeal allowed.


    --- *** ---
    .

    You might also like