PATNA HIGH COURT ISSUES JUDGMENT ON DILIP RAM V/S THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ANR.

PATNA, India, April 23 -- Patna High Court issued the following judgment on March 23:

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Despite service of notice on respondent no. 2/ victim, the victim chose not to enter appearance to oppose this appeal.

3. The present appeal has been preferred for setting aside the judgment of conviction dated 07.06.2023 (hereinafter referred to as the 'impugned judgment') and the order of sentence dated 12.06.2023 (hereinafter referred to as the 'impugned order') passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cumSpecial Judge, Sheohar (hereinafter referred to as the 'learned trial court') in POCSO Case No. 33 of 2018 arising out of Sheohar Mahila P.S. Case No. 33 of 2018. By the impugned judgment, the appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (in short 'POCSO Act') and Section 376(2) (i) of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC') and by the impugned order, he has been ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for twenty years with a fine of Rs.10,000/- under Section 4 of the POCSO Act and in default of payment, he has to further undergo simple imprisonment for twelve months.

Prosecution Case

4. The prosecution case is based on the written application of the informant (PW-3). In her written application, she has stated that this appellant committed rape eight months ago on her minor daughter (PW-4) aged 14 years on the pretext of marriage and when she became pregnant and told this fact to the appellant, he started making distance. She has further alleged that when she told this fact to the family of the appellant then the father of the appellant and, his uncles, namely, Ravindra Ram, Musafir Ram, Vishwanath Kumar got angry and the father of the appellant asked the informant to leave and threatened her to kill her family and her daughter, if she would tell this fact to anyone. The informant also alleged that the accused persons assaulted them.

5. On the basis of this written application, Sheohar Mahilla P.S. Case No. 33 of 2018 dated 26.09.2018 was registered under Section 4 of the POCSO Act and Sections 323, 341, 376(2)(i), 504 and 506 of the IPC against accused persons, namely, (1) Dinesh Ram, (2) Ravindra Ram, (3) Musafir Ram, (4) Vishwanath Kumar and (5) Dilip Kumar (this appellant). After investigation police submitted charghesheet being Chargesheet No. 01/19 dated 10.01.2019 against accused Dilip Kumar under Sections 376(2)(i), 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act and against rest of the accused persons under Sections 341, 323, 504, 506/34 IPC. Learned trial court vide order dated 07.02.2019 took cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(i), 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act against accused Dilip Kumar and against rest of the accused under Sections 341, 323, 504, 506/34 IPC.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://patnahighcourt.gov.in/viewjudgment/NSM2MjUjMjAyMyMxI04=-l6J1N5H2BSE=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.