Meraj alam & ors. -vs- state of Bihar

 

 

MERAJ ALAM AND ORS –VS-  STATE OF BIHAR

[2008 Cri.LJ 4384]

 

Afsana Khatoon who was visiting her maternal uncle’s place. After a while, the people in the vicinity could hear falter sounds made by Afsana from the closed room. The people in the neighborhood rushed in through the door of the closed room. The Complainant through sign language and gesture expressed and depicted that she was raped by Meraj Alam, the Appellant-Accused herein. A compromise was reached by the Appellant and Complainant whereby they both agreed to marry each other; however, the accused backed out from the said compromise. Hence, the present case was filed.

FACTS OF THE CASE

This case was brought before the Hon’ble Patna High Court in the form of a criminal appeal against the Judgement and Order passed by Learned Additional Sessions Judge-FTC-IV, Bettiah, West Champaran, Bihar whereby the Hon’ble Judge sentenced the Appellant- Accused herein to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment under Section 376 of IPC and imposed a fine of Rs. 5,000/-.

In the present case, Ms. Rina Sinha was appointed as Amicus Curiae for the Appellant herein and the Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has represented the State of Bihar before the Hon’ble High Court. In the present case, the Appellant-Accused herein through gestures and signs called into his room, Afsana Khatoon a dumb and deaf person. The people in neighbourhood heard her sound from behind the closed doors of the room, after a while. When they went inside, they found that Afsana was weeping and her clothes were not in proper order. On questioning, she

pointed out through signs and gestures that she was raped by Meeraj Alam alias Tuddu, the Appellant herein. The Appellant Meeraj reached a compromise with the family of the victim Afsana whereby it was decided that they would marry each other. However, the Appellant backed out of the said compromise later on and hence, a complaint was filed by Afsana’s father before the Sathi Police Station and hence, Case No. 22/2002 was filed by the Police against the Appellants herein. On completion of investigation and trial before the Additional Sessions Judge-FTC-IV, Bettiah, West Champaran, Bihar the accused was found guilty of offence under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 while his father Gausal Azam was charged with Section 201 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. Hence, the present criminal appeal was filed by the Appellant-Accused herein before the Hon’ble Patna High Court.

During 2002- Sathi PS Case No. 22 of 2002 was filed in the Sathi Police Station against Appellant-Accused, Meraj Alam alias Tuddu for committing rape against complainant who is a deaf and dumb woman.

On 16.02.2006- After investigation and trial, Learned Additional Sessions Judge-FTC-IV, Bettiah, West Champaran, Bihar found the Appellant-Accused to be guilty under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the punishment given was of rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with a fine of Rs. 5,000/-.

During 2006- Aggrieved by the Judgement and Order, the Appellant-Accused filed Crl. Appeal No. 194 of 2006 before the Hon’ble Patna High Court.

On 21.05.2008- Justice Subhash Chandra Jha passed the Judgement and Order in this case.

ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE CASE

I. Whether Prosecution proved before the Fast track court that the Appellant-Accused herein, committed offence under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the complainant?

II. Whether prosecution proved such guilt of Appellant-Accused beyond reasonable doubt?

Many crucial provisions of Criminal law have been used in this case. These provisions have been listed below.

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973-

• Section 377(1)(b) - Appeal before the Hon’ble High Court against order of conviction passed by the lower court.

Indian Penal Code, 1860-

• Section 34- Section which adduces common intention

• Section 201- Causing disappearance of evidence

• Section 354-Outraging the modesty of Woman

• Section 376- Punishment of Rape (Rape is defined under Section 375 of IPC)

JUDGEMENT

In the present case, the Hon’ble Patna High Court came to the following conclusions after considering all the material on record.

The victim, Afsana Khatoon alias Bagari who was deaf and dumb could not adduce through the help of expert witness namely, Sister Molly Chako that rape was committed on her. As per the statement made by the victim before the Trial Court, the victim was locked in the room and her clothes were untied by the Appellant-Accused herein.

The prosecution further could not produce any evidence or witness on record proving that there was forceful sexual intercourse.

The court through its Judgement and Order held that

a)  Appellant-Accused, Meraj Alam alias Tuddu has not committed rape however; he wasinvolved in confining the victim herein and untying her clothes. Hence, he is guilty

for Section 354 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. This section pertains to outraging the modesty of woman.

b) The court set aside the award of sentence against the father and uncle of the accused herein who have been convicted under Section 201 of IPC for destroying evidence.

“There shall be no conviction without proper evidence."