Judgment 1. JUDGMENT :- The appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 2-12-1994 passed in Sessions Trial No. 181 of 1991 by the Sessions Judge, Singhbhum West at Chaibasa, whereby the learned Sessions Judge has convicted all the three accused-appellants under S. 376, I.P.C. and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for seven years each. He has also convicted accused-Jagannath Nishad under S. 379, I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for one year. The sentences are to run concurrently. 2 In short the case of the prosecution is that the informant Jambi Bugiuli, daughter of Birke Buriuli along with her friend Pitnu Kumkal had gone to sell Haria wine on 13-9-1990 to Tatnagar Hat. After selling Haria wine both of them were returning back to their home. The informant had sold Haria worth Rs. 60.00 and she had also Rs. 30.00 in addition to it which she had taken from home for purchasing cloth, and so she was having Rs. 70.00 with her. While returning they met Jagbandhu Hambria and Bamia Alde and all the four were proceeding to their house. At about 7 p.m. When the informant and others reached near the meeting point of Dara-Ganjia-Barakoita road another jeep was coming from behind and in the light of the jeep the informant saw three persons standing on the road, among whom she identified Jagbandhu Nishad (accused-appellant) and she had also seen the faces of other two accused persons in the light of the jeep. The fardbeyan of the informant Jambi Buriuli was recorded on 20-9-1990 at about 12O clock in the day at the house of Ilakamanki in Canjiya village and there she had identified two other accused persons who had been detained there. Jagbandhu Nishad and the two other accused persons had ordered the informant and others to stop there on the road and at that time Jagbandhu Nishad and one of the other accused persons were armed with Bhujali. When the informant and her other companions stopped, Bamia, who was there (informant and others) fled away. In the meantime, one of the accused caught Jagbandhu Henbram, who was also returning with the informant and her friend but he also managed to escape. When the informant and her other companions stopped, Bamia, who was there (informant and others) fled away. In the meantime, one of the accused caught Jagbandhu Henbram, who was also returning with the informant and her friend but he also managed to escape. Thereafter, one of the two other accused persons, whose name she had learnt at the time of recording of her fardbeyan as Jagannath Nishad caught her and threatened her and forcibly put her down on the road and committed rape on her. Jagbandhu Nishad committed rape on her friend Pitru. Thereafter accused-Jagabandhu Nishad and Munna Nishad committed rape on her (informant) one after another. After committing rape on the two girls accused-Jagbandhu Nishad snatched Rs. 70.00 from the informant. In the meantime, Radhey Purti and Baya Purti came there and thereafter three accused persons fled away. The two victim girls went to the house of Radhey Purti and Baya Purti and remained there in the night, as they happened to be their maternal uncles (Manes) in relation. On the next evening both the girls went to their houses, but they did not narrate about the occurrence at their houses due to shame and prestige. When Manki called them at his house the informant narrated about the occurrence to him. The fardbeyan of Jambi Budiuli was recorded on 20-9-1990 at 12 hours by D. K. Ghosh, A.S.I. of Police, Maujhari P.S., Dist. West Singhbhum at village Ganjiya in the house Sahan of Madhusudan Alde-Ilake-Manki. The fardbeyan is Ext. 3 in this case. On the basis of the fardbeyan formal F.I.R. was drawn in this case. After investigation police submitted charge-sheet against the accused persons. The learned chief Judicial Magistrate after taking cognizance of the case committed case to the Court of Session for trial. 3. The defence of the accused persons according to the trend of the cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses is that they have been falsely implicated in this case. 4. It was contended by the learned lawyer appearing on behalf of the appellants that there has been inordinate delay in the lodging of the F.I.R. as the occurrence is said to have taken place on 13th September, 1990, and the fardbeyan of the informant was recorded by the police on 20th September, 1990. 4. It was contended by the learned lawyer appearing on behalf of the appellants that there has been inordinate delay in the lodging of the F.I.R. as the occurrence is said to have taken place on 13th September, 1990, and the fardbeyan of the informant was recorded by the police on 20th September, 1990. It was also contended by him that the delay in lodging the F.I.R. has not been explained, and the medical officer who had examined both the victim girls has not opined that rape was committed on both the girls. It was also submitted by the learned lawyer of the appellants that the two victim girls had not said about the occurrence to their family members when they had returned to their respective houses. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State submitted that the delay in lodging the F.I.R. has been well explained, and the informant, who is P.W. 3 in this case, has clearly stated in her evidence that due to shame and her prestige she had not told about the occurrence to her father and mother and when village Manki called her she had told about it to him. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor also submitted that the medical officer (P.W. 1), Dr. Biren Baha Topo has said that the victim had sexual intercourse and dead spermatozoa was found on examination of vaginal smear of the informant. 5. In this case five witnesses have been examined on behalf of the prosecution. P.W. 3 is Jambi Buriuli, the informant, and one of the victim girls of this case. According to her she along with her friend Pitnu Kunkal had gone to Tatnagar Hat for selling Haria wine and she had also taken Rs. 30.00 from her house purchasing some cloth, but she had not purchased the cloth, and thus she had Rs. 30.00 in addition to the amount which she had got by selling Haria wine. She has said that she was returning to her home along with Pitnu Kunkal at about 9 p.m. and in the way she met Jagbandhu Hembram and Bamia Alde, and all the four were proceeding to their house. She has further said that when she reached at a Chowk near village Gajia she saw in the light of jeep that three persons were standing in front of the Chowk, among whom she had identified Jagbandhu Nishad. She has further said that when she reached at a Chowk near village Gajia she saw in the light of jeep that three persons were standing in front of the Chowk, among whom she had identified Jagbandhu Nishad. She had also seen the faces of other two accused persons in the light of the jeep. Further, according to her all the three accused persons surrounded her and Pitnu Kunkal and in the meantime Jagbandhu Hembram and Bamia Alda fled away. She has stated that the three accused persons committed rape on her and Pitnu Kunkal and accused-Jagbandhu Nishad was armed with Bhujali and at the time of committing rape accused-Jagbandhu Nishad also took away her money. She has said that Radhey Purti and Baya Purti of village Pasubera came there who happened to be her Mama and then the three accused persons fled away, and thereafter she and Pitnu went to the house of her Mama. According to her she and her friend returned to their house on the next day, and thereafter they went to Manki. She has further said that when she had gone to Manki, Daroga was there and Pitnu was also there and Daroga recorded her (P.W. 3) statement and accused-Jagannath Nishad and Munna Nishad were present there whose names she had learnt there and she had identified them at the time of occurrence and they had also committed rape on her and Pitnu. She has stated that the accused persons had committed rape on her and Pitnu. According to her, Manki had read over and explained the statement to her on which she had put her thumb impression and Pitnu had also put her thumb impression on it and Madhusudan Alde had signed on it. The signature of Madhusudan Alde on the fardbeyan is Ext. 2. She has said that she and Pitnu were medically examined. 6. P.W. 1 is Dr. Biren Baha Tope. She has stated that on 21-9-1990 she was posted as Civil Assistant Surgeon of Sadar Hospital, Chaibasa. She has said that she had examined Pitnu Kankal at 1.15 p.m. and the victim was referred to hospital by Manjhuri police. According to her (P.W. 1) she had found her breast developed auxiliary hairs present but scanty pubic hairs present and her vaginal smear examination report was not showing any spermatozoa either living or dead. She has said that she had examined Pitnu Kankal at 1.15 p.m. and the victim was referred to hospital by Manjhuri police. According to her (P.W. 1) she had found her breast developed auxiliary hairs present but scanty pubic hairs present and her vaginal smear examination report was not showing any spermatozoa either living or dead. Epetherial cells fair number were seen, pus cells found. She (P.W. 1) has stated that she found her vagina admitting two fingers easily and she had not found any injury over the body or her private part. According to her on ossification examination she found her age about 18 to 19 years. She has said that she did not come to any positive opinion as to whether she was raped or not. Her report is Ext. 1. She has further stated that she had examined Jambi Budiuli (informant) on the same day. She has stated that on examination of her vaginal smear dead spermatozoas were found and epitherial cells were in fair number, old rupture of hymen was found, and she had found her vagina admitting one finger tightly, and she had not found injury on her private part. According to her, the radiological examination of the girl was made and she found her age about 17 to 18 years. In her opinion she had sexual intercourse. Ext. 1/1 is her medical report. She has said in her cross-examination that she had carefully examined the entire body of both the girls. She has further said in her cross-examination that dead spermatozoas may be found present in the private part up to 3 days and also 25 days if the private part is not washed and disturbed. The occurrence of this case is of 13-9-1990, and the informant Jambi Budiuli (P.W. 3) was medically examined on 21-9-1990 i.e., after a week of the occurrence and dead spermatozoa was found by the doctor, on examination of her vaginal smear. According to the statement in the cross-examination of the doctor (P.W. 1) the dead spermatozoa may be found after 25 days also if the private part is not washed and disturbed. So the fact that sexual intercourse had been committed on the informant has been proved by the medical evidence. 7. P.W. 2 is Madhusudan Alda. He has stated that he is Manki of the area. So the fact that sexual intercourse had been committed on the informant has been proved by the medical evidence. 7. P.W. 2 is Madhusudan Alda. He has stated that he is Manki of the area. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that Mankis are local village heads. He (P.W. 2) has stated that on 15-9-1990 Jagbandhu Hembram had informed him that on 13-9-1990 Jagbandhu Nishad, Munna Nishad and Jagannath Nishad had committed rape on Jambi and another girl, and he had called a meeting on 19-9-1990 in which both the girls had also come and they had told him that Jagbandhu Nishad, Munna Nishad and Jagannath Nishad had committed rape on them, and in that meeting Munna and Jagannath were also present and Daroga was informed and he came and recorded the statement of Jambi at his (P.W. 2) house, and Daroga had also gone to the place of occurrence. According to him after the Daroga had recorded the statement of Jambi, it was read over to her and after finding it correct Jambi had put her thumb impressions on it, and he (P.W. 2) had signed on it. Ext. 2 is his signature on the fardbeyan. The evidence of P.W. 2, Madhusudan Alda, who is Manki of the area shows that he had called a meeting on 19-9-1990 in which he had called both the victim girls and the Daroga had recorded the fardbeyan of the informant there. So the delay in lodging the F.I.R. has been well explained. He (P.W. 2) has said that he had detained Munna Nishad and Jagannath Nishad with him and handed them over to Daroga when he came. 8. Pitnu Kunkal (P.W. 4) is another victim girl. She has stated that she had gone to Tatlnagar with Jambi Budiuli for selling Haria wine, and after selling it both of them were returning to their house and in the way she met Bamia Alda and Jagannath Hembram, who also proceeded with them. She has said that at the Chawk of village Tara, Gangia and Koita, Jagbandhu Nishad and two others were standing. During her evidence in the trial Court this witness (P.W. 4 had identified all the three accused in the dock. She has said that they (accused persons) threatened her and Jambi and thereafter all the three accused persons committed rape on her and Jambi. During her evidence in the trial Court this witness (P.W. 4 had identified all the three accused in the dock. She has said that they (accused persons) threatened her and Jambi and thereafter all the three accused persons committed rape on her and Jambi. According to her two persons came from Basubera village, who were Baya and Radhey and then the accused persons fled away. Further, according to her Baya and Radhey are sons of her Mama and they (P.W. 4 and Jambi) went with them to village Basubera and remained there in the night. She has said that she had gone to Manki Madhusudan after one week of the occurrence where she had been called and she was present there at the time of recording of statement of Jambi. According to her, she had identified the accused persons in the light of the jeep. 9. P.W. 5 is Deo Dutt Kumar Ghosh, I.O. of the case. According to him on 20-9-1990 he was posted at Manjhari P.S. as A.S.I. of Police and on that day he had recorded the fardbeyan of Jambi Budiuli in village Ganjiya. Ext. 3 is the fardbeyan. He has said that at the time of recording of fardbeyan on two accused were there. He has said that he sent both the victims for medical examination and he received the medical report. He has also said that after completing investigation he submitted charge-sheet in this case. 10. There is nothing in the cross-examination of these witnesses, P.W. 1 (Dr. Biren Baha Topo), P.W. 2( Madhusudan Alda), P.W. 3 (Jambi Buriuli), P.W. 4 (Pitnu Kunkal) and P.W. 5 (Deb Dutt Kumar Ghose) to disbelieve their evidence. The above evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubts that all the three accused-appellants have committed the offence punishable under S. 376, I.P.C. and accused-Jagbandhu Nishad has also committed the offence punishable under S. 379, I.P.C. The occurrence of this case is of 13-9-1990 and so it is nearly ten years since then. In view of the fact that the case was instituted about ten years back and the accused persons have been under shadow of the case for a long time and in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, a sentence of five years R.I. under S. 376, I.P.C. to all the three accused-appellants will meet the ends of justice. Therefore the sentence of the three accused-appellants, Konda alias Munna Nishad, Jagannath Nishad and Jagbandhu Nishad under S. 376, I.P.C. is reduced to R.I. for five years each under S. 376, I.P.C. There does not appear any reason to interfere with the sentence passed under S. 379, I.P.C. against the accused-appellant-Jagbandhu Nishad. 11. With the above modification in the judgment and order of conviction and sentence this criminal appeal is dismissed. All the accused-appellants are on bail. Their bail bonds are cancelled, and they are directed to surrender in the Court of Sessions Judge, Singhbhum West at Chaibasa forthwith to serve out their sentences. The learned Sessions Judge of Singhbhum West at Chaibasa will also take all necessary steps in this regard. Appeal dismissed.