JUDGMENT
R.K. Merathia, J.
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 23.9.1999, passed by Shri S. Narayan, Sessions Judge, Chaibasa Camp at Seraikella in Sessions Trial No. 440 of 1995 convicting the appellant under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years. The appellant was acquitted of the charges under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. No Counsel appeared for the appellant on repeated calls. Mr. Faizal Rahman assisted as amicus curiae on behalf of the appellant. He pointed out various contradictions and submitted that only on the basis of evidence of the victim lady, the appellant has been convicted.
3. The prosecution case in short is that Rabindra Nath Dey, father of victim Sulekha lodged written report on 13.8.1995 (Ext. 1) to the effect that Sulekha was married with Jagarnath Dan, son of the appellant on 7.12.1994. The appellant demanded heavy dowry which was paid. On 2.8.1995 the informant received information that his son-in-law, Jagarnath Dan was seriously ill whereupon he reached Chandil where he was informed by the appellant-Samadhi of the informant that on 31.7.1995 Jagarnath Dan had committed suicide by hanging himself with a tree and that appellant had disposed of the dead body after getting post mortem done. The informant wanted to bring back her daughter, Sulekha but appellant did not send her on different pretexts but finally the informant got her to his house on 7.8.1995, Thereafter the informant knew from his daughter Sulekha that her husband was physically weak and on the next day of the marriage the appellant said her that even if his son is physically weak he would compensate the physical weakness of his son and on the very next date of the marriage the appellant committed rape with her and threatened that in case she disclose about it to anybody, she would be killed. Sulekha further informed her father that fearing her own and family prestige, she did not disclose this to anyone. Again the appellant committed rape on Sulekha. It was further stated by Sulekha that on 31.7.1995 her husband Jagarnath informed her to keep the room closed as he was going outside to display video, but when she woke up in the dead night she saw the appellant moving in the house and he was very much perturbed. Then she came to know from the appellant that her husband had committed suicide by hanging himself from a tree: Thereafter his dead body was taken to Jamshedpur on the pretext of illness and it was cremated after post-mortem. It was alleged in the report that the appellant taking advantage of the weakness of his son committed rape twice during her stay at the house of the appellant and also committed murder of his son-in-law.
4. Charges were framed against the appellant under Sections 376 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant pleaded not guilty.
5. Five witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution. Dr. Akhilesh Kumar Choudhary is P.W. 5, who held post-mortem on the dead body of Jagarnath, P.W. 4, Sheo Kumar Pathak is the Investigating Officer. P.W. 3 Kesto Nag has been tendered for cross-examination. P.W. 2 is the informant and victim lady Sulekha is P.W. 1.
6. The victim lady stated in her evidence that she was married with Jagarnath Dan, son of the appellant on 7.12.1994 according to Hindu Custom. When “Suhag Raat” was observed on 9.12.1994 she knew that her husband was physically weak. When her husband went outside for displaying video and she was sleeping in the house, appellant forcibly committed rape on her. For her own prestige and for the prestige of her family and also due to threat by the appellant she did not disclose about the same to anybody. Again after 10-12 days the appellant committed rape on her. Then she disclosed about the same to her mother-in-law and her husband. There was a quarrel between her husband and the appellant. On 31.7.1995 her husband asked the appellant to give jewellery and other articles of Sulekha to him so that he can send her to her father’s house. On this, there was a quarrel between her husband and the appellant. Thereafter her husband asked her to close the door and live inside as he was going to display video. In the night when she woke up she saw that appellant was moving in the house and was very much perturbed and then she came to know that her husband was hanging with a tree. The appellant brought a Maruti Van and took her husband to Jamshedpur for treatment and he informed that her husband had died and had been cremated at Jamshedpur.
7. In this case the victim lady is the only competent witness to prove the allegation of rape on her. Within a short span of time of the marriage, the appellant committed rape on her and again after 10-12 days he repeated the same. The victim has said that on the first occasion due to fear of her prestige and the prestige of her family and also due to threat of the appellant, she did not say anybody about the incident. But when rape was committed again, she reported the same to her mother-in-law and her husband. She did not tell about rape before the police for the same reasons. She narrated the whole matter to her father also when she was taken by him to his house after the death of her husband. The sin of the appellant led his son to commit suicide.
8. This is a case where father like father-in-law committed rape on her daughter like daughter-in-law twice, within a short span of time after the marriage, taking advantage of physical weakness of his son.
9. Regarding sentence, it appears that taking into consideration the age of the appellant, i.e., 60 years, he has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for ten years. I am not inclined to disturb the same.
10. After hearing the parties and considering the materials on record, I do not find any ground to interfere with the judgment.
11. In the result, this appeal is dismissed.