Patna High Court
Rajdeo Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 26 June, 2025
Author: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
Bench: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, Ashok Kumar Pandey
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No.333 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-121 Year-2021 Thana- BETTIAH CITY District- West
Champaran
======================================================
Rajdeo Kumar, Son of Prabhu Yadav, Resident of Village- Chawni, P.S.-
Bettiah Nagar (Kalibagh OP), Distt- West Champaran.
... ... Appellant
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. 'X' C/o Imtiyaj Alam @ Videshi, Resident of Mirja Toli, Ward no. 6, P.S.-
Kalibag (OP) Nagar Bettia, Dist- West Champaran.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Samrendra Kumar Jha, Advocate
Mr. Shakti Kumar Gaurav, Advocate
Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Addl.PP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)
Date : 26-06-2025
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Despite service of
notice on respondent no. 2 - informant, she has chosen not to enter
appearance.
2. The present appeal has been preferred for setting
aside the judgment of conviction dated 25.01.2023 (hereinafter
referred to as the 'impugned judgment') and the order of sentence
dated 02.02.2023 (hereinafter referred to as the 'impugned order')
passed by learned ADJ-VI-cum-Special Judge, POCSO, Bettiah
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.333 of 2023 dt.26-06-2025
2/19
(West Champaran) (hereinafter called the 'learned trial court') in
SGR No. 05/2021 (C.I.S. - POCSO-50/2021) arising out of Bettiah
Nagar (Kalibagh OP) P.S. Case No. 121 of 2021.
3. By the impugned judgment, the appellant has been
convicted for the offence under Sections 376AB, 324, 307 of the
Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC') and Sections 4, 6, 8 of the
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (in short
'POCSO Act') and by the impugned order, the appellant has been
directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years under
Section 324 IPC. He has also been ordered to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for ten years with a fine of Rs.25000/- under Section
307 IPC and in default of payment of fine, he has to further
undergo three months rigorous imprisonment. He has further been
ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for twenty years with a
fine of Rs.75000/- under Section 376AB IPC and Sections 4, 6 of
the POCSO Act and in default of payment of fine, he has to further
undergo six months rigorous imprisonment. Lastly, he has been
ordered to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of
Rs.25000/- under Section 8 of the POCSO Act and in default of
payment of fine, he has to further undergo three months rigorous
imprisonment. All the sentences are to run concurrently.
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.333 of 2023 dt.26-06-2025
3/19
Prosecution Case
4. The prosecution story is based on the fardbeyan of
the informant (PW-3) who is a ten years old girl recorded by P.S.I.
Sudha Kumari Town P.S. Bettiah on 21.02.2021 at 14:10 PM in
Emergency Ward, G.M.C., Bettiah. In her fardbeyan, the informant
alleged that on 20.02.2021 at about 06:00 PM when she was going
to purchase medicine for her dadi from a shop near Uttarvari
Pokhra, then near Uttarvari Pokhra Temple two persons came on a
bicycle and stopped near her. Out of the two persons, she
identified one person, namely, Rajdeo Kumar (appellant) and the
name of second person is not known to her. Rajdeo Kumar said her
that his father is calling her and the second person forcibly put her
on the bicycle and tied cloth on her mouth. Rajdeo started riding
bicycle and took her near Jhilliya in an empty plot. Both removed
her clothes and committed wrong act, bite her lips and assaulted
her which resulted in injuries in her eyes. Thereafter, both caught
hold of her by neck and slit her neck with a blade which resulted in
profuse bleeding and she became unconscious. Both left her there
presuming that she had died. After some time, when she regained
consciousness, she went to Sanjay Mukhiya and on seeing her, he
wrapped gamcha around her neck and sent her to Bettiah Hospital
for treatment and informed her family members.
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.333 of 2023 dt.26-06-2025
4/19
5. On the basis of this fardbeyan, Bettiah Nagar
(Kalibagh OP) P.S. Case No. 121 of 2021 dated 21.02.2021 was
registered under Sections 376(D)/(B)/324/307/34 IPC and Sections
4/6/17
of the POCSO Act. After investigation, Police submitted
chargesheet bearing No. 257 of 2021 dated 20.04.2021 against this
appellant under Sections 376AB/324/307 IPC and Section 4/6 of
the POCSO Act keeping the investigation pending against another
accused. On the basis of the chargesheet, learned trial court took
cognizance of the offences vide order dated 03.08.2021 and
directed to split off the record of the accused whose investigation
is pending. Charges were read over and explained to the appellant
in Hindi to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
Accordingly, vide order dated 07.09.2021, charges were framed
under Sections 376AB, 324 and 307 IPC and Section 4, 6, 8 of the
POCSO Act.
6. In course of trial, the prosecution examined as many
as six witnesses and exhibited several documents to prove its’ case.
The list of the prosecution witnesses and the exhibits produced on
behalf of the prosecution are being shown hereunder in tabular
form:-
List of Prosecution Witnesses
PW-1 Mother of the Victim
PW-2 Father of the Victim
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.333 of 2023 dt.26-06-2025
5/19PW-3 Victim (Informant)
PW-4 Manish Kumar (S.I.)
PW-5 Randhir Kumar (S.I.)
PW-6 Dr. Santosh KumarList of Documents produced on behalf of Prosecution
Exhibit P-1 Signature of the victim on her statement
under Section 164 CrPC
Exhibit P-2 Signature of the Victim on Fardbeyan
Exhibit P-3 Signature of the S.H.O. Rakesh Kumar
Bhashkar of Bettiah Town Kalibagh O.P.
P.S. on the endorsement of the
Fardbeyan
Exhibit P-4 Signature of S.I. Manish Kumar on
forwarding letter
Exhibit P-5 Signature of the S.H.O. Rakesh Kumar
Bhashkar over the formal FIR
Exhibit P-6 Seizure list of bicycle of accused,
undergarments and cloth of accused.
Mobile of accused recovered from the
house of the accused prepared by S.I.
Manish Kumar and his signature over
the same
Exhibit P-7 Seizure list of pant, hair, clutcher of the
victim and blood stained blade recovered
from the place of occurrence
Exhibit P-8 Seizure list of broken grass recovered
from the place of occurrence
Exhibit P-9 Seizure list of 16 GB pendrive prepared
by S.I. Sudha Kumari and her signature
over the same
Exhibit P-10 Certification of owner of CCTV Camera
Manoj Kumar over the seizure list
Exhibit P-11 Certificate issued by Quran House
Academy regarding the age assessment
of the victim girl
Exhibit P-12 F.S.L. report in a sealed envelope
Exhibit P-13 C.D.R. report of mobile no. 9523472820
from 18.02.2021 to 20.02.2021
Exhibit P-14 Medical report of the victim prepared by
Dr. Santosh Kumar.
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.333 of 2023 dt.26-06-2025
6/19Findings of the Learned Trial Court
7. Learned trial court after analysing the evidences
available on the record found that the accused Rajdev Kumar took
away the victim, who is a minor aged 12 years, on his bicycle,
raped her and injured her by blade on her neck. Learned trial court
found that the allegation alleged against the accused was proved
by mere examination of the victim during trial and condition of the
victim during investigation. Learned trial court found that there is
no possibility of false statement by the victim as nothing has been
contradicted by the defence.
8. Learned trial court after considering all the materials
available on the record found that the prosecution has been able to
bring home the charges framed against the appellant, hence, he
was convicted of the charges under Sections 376AB, 324, 307 IPC
and Sections 4, 6, 8 of the POCSO Act.
Submissions on behalf of the appellant
9. Learned counsel for the appellant has assailed the
impugned judgment and order on various grounds. It is submitted
that the prosecution story is false and concocted. According to the
appellant, in the CCTV footage the victim was seen alone on the
bicycle. Sanjay Mukhiya would have been the most important
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.333 of 2023 dt.26-06-2025
7/19
witness as he got the victim admitted in the hospital and the S.I.
Sudha Kumari who was present during the treatment of the victim
have not been examined.
10. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there
is no medical report to corroborate the prosecution case. The
doctor (PW-6) has, in his deposition, kept silence on the
assault/recent sexual intercourse with the victim.
11. It is submitted that the blood found on the seized
blade was not sent to FSL for matching with the blood of the
victim. No vaginal swab was sent to the FSL to ascertain the
version of the victim with respect to committing rape by the
appellant. The trial court has ignored the contradictory statements
given by the victim and has convicted the appellant by ignoring his
plea that the case was lodged against him due to his insistence
upon the father of the victim to return the debt.
Submissions on behalf of the State
12. On the other hand, learned Addl.P.P. for the State
submits that in this case the evidences available on the record have
been duly considered by the learned trial court. The victim of this
case is a sterling witness and there is no reason to disbelieve her.
13. Learned Addl.P.P. further submits that on disclosure
made by the appellant, pant, hair cluture and the blooded blade
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.333 of 2023 dt.26-06-2025
8/19
were recovered from the place of the occurrence. The bicycle has
been seized from the house of the accused. The undergarments and
cloth of the accused were seized as per Exhibit P-6. The seizure
list of broken grass recovered from the place of occurrence is
Exhibit-P-8 and the seizure list of 16 GB pen drive prepared by
S.I. Sudha Kumari and the signature over the same was of S.I.
Manish Kumar have been duly proved. Exhibit-P10 is the
certification of owner of CCTV camera Manoj Kumar who has
certified that the camera belongs to him and he had given
permission for perusal of the said camera and with his permission
S.I. Manish Kumar had collected the footage from the camera.
14. It is submitted that the age of the victim has been
duly proved by virtue of the certificate issued by Quran House
Academy School (Exhibit P-11) and the medical report of the
victim (Exhibit P-14) has been proved by Dr. Santosh Kumar (PW-
6). Defence has not questioned the age of the victim.
15. It is submitted that there are clinching materials on
the record from which the guilt of the appellant has been proved
beyond all reasonable doubts.
16. It is further submitted that on a bare perusal of
Sections 29 and 30 of the POCSO Act, it would appear that where
a person is prosecuted for committing any offence under Sections
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.333 of 2023 dt.26-06-2025
9/19
3, 5, 7 and 9 of the POCSO Act, the Special Court shall presume
that such person has committed the offence unless the contrary is
proved. The primary facts which are required to be proved to raise
the presumption are available on the record, therefore, the onus
would shift upon the accused to prove his innocence. In this case
the appellant would not be able to raise any suspicion/doubt over
the prosecution story.
Consideration
17. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and
learned Addl.P.P. for the State as also perused the trial court
records. The victim in this case is PW-3. The I.O. (PW-5) had
verified the age of the victim. He had collected the age certificate
issued by the school of the victim, namely, Quran House Academy
School. The said certificate has been marked Exhibit P-11).
According to the certificate the date of birth of the victim is
09.06.2011. Exhibit P-11 has been marked exhibit without
objection and from the pattern of the cross-examination of the
prosecution witnesses, it is evident that the defence has not
questioned the age of the victim being minor at the time of
occurrence.
18. The victim girl (PW-3) has stated that on the date of
occurrence at about 5.00-5.30 PM she had gone to purchase the
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.333 of 2023 dt.26-06-2025
10/19
medicine when this appellant and one another person came near
the temple, the another person made her to sit on the bicycle.
Second person put a cloth in her mouth and took her behind the
Depot where this appellant opened her slacks pant and second
person caught hold of her hand. She has stated that the appellant
Rajdeo uncle had given her a bite and inserted his finger in her
urination part and committed bad act with her. She has further
stated that the second person was forcibly holding her whereafter
she started soughting then both the uncles cut her neck by a blade,
threw her in a garbage thinking that she had died, thereafter she
regained her consciousness and somehow with the help of the wall
she could reach to the house of Sanjay uncle who identified him,
he put his Gamcha on her neck and took her to the hospital. Her
Abu and Ammi both reached the hospital, thereafter she came to
the Mahila police station where her statement was recorded. PW-3
has also proved her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. on which
she had put her signature. She has identified her signature on the
fardbeyan also. Both the documents have been marked Exhibit P-1
and P-2 respectively. In her cross-examination, PW-3 was asked
about the distance between the place of occurrence and the house
of Sanjay Mukhiya and that how many houses are situated in
between the two places, PW-3 expressed her unawareness. In her
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.333 of 2023 dt.26-06-2025
11/19
further cross-examination, she has stated about the sequence in
which she was made to sit on the bicycle. She has reiterated that
she was taken to hospital by Sanjay uncle and after 10-15 minutes
her parents also reached the hospital. The defence suggested the
victim that her father had taken a loan of Rs.4,80,000/- from the
appellant for purchasing the various equipment of the gym and on
asking her father to return the money, there was a quarrel between
her father and the appellant. PW-3 denied the suggestion. She also
denied the suggestion that her father and Rajdeo were quarreling
even prior to the occurrence. The defence suggested her that the
alleged occurrence had been committed by some one else whom
she could not identify but because of the enmity with the accused
he has been falsely implicated. The victim (PW-3) denied the
suggestion.
19. From the pattern of the cross-examination of the
victim, it is evident that the defence has not questioned her age.
The defence has also not questioned the happening of the
occurrence with the victim (PW-3). On the one hand, the defence
is that there was a quarrel between the appellant and the father of
the victim when he demanded return of loan amount of
Rs.4,80,000/- and at the same time the defence is that the
occurrence was committed by some one else whom the victim
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.333 of 2023 dt.26-06-2025
12/19
could not identify. As regards the loan transaction, there is no
witness in whose presence the appellant had given the loan to the
father of the victim.
20. The mother of the victim has been examined as PW-
1 and the father of the victim has been examined as PW-2. Both of
them have supported the prosecution case. They have stated what
they were informed by the victim girl. PW-1 has denied the
suggestion of the defence that the appellant had given
Rs.4,80,000/- to her husband for opening of fitness gym. Her
husband had earned in Saudi where he was in a job, he had
established a gym at Bettiah where the gym had become popular
and earned good name. PW-2 has stated that the statement of the
victim was recorded in the government hospital on the next day of
the occurrence at 3.20 PM. She has denied the suggestion of the
defence that she was tutoring the victim to make a statement
before the police which she had given. PW-2 denied this
suggestion. PW-2 also denied the suggestion that he had taken
money from the appellant to set up the gym.
21. Manish Kumar (PW-4) is the officer in-charge of
Bettiah Town Kalibagh O.P. He has proved the signature of the
then officer in-charge Rakesh Kumar on the endorsement made on
the application as Exhibit P-3. He had forwarded the fardbeyan to
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.333 of 2023 dt.26-06-2025
13/19
Bettiah Town P.S. on which he has identified his signature marked
Exhibit P-4. He has also proved the formal FIR on which the
officer in-charge Rakesh Kumar Bhashkar had put his signature.
This has been marked Exhibit-5.
22. PW-4 has stated that S.I. Sudha Kumari had
recorded the restatement of the victim in GMCH Emergency Ward
in which the victim had supported her case. The accused was
arrested and in course of investigation the bicycle, mobile and
cloth of the accused were seized. He has proved the seizure list as
Exhibit P-6. According to PW-4, the accused had confessed his
guilt and on the disclosure made by him, the used blade and
undergarments of the victim were recovered as per seizure list
(Exhibit P-7). PW-4 had also seized the black colour slacks pant
and Gulabi colour hair cluture and the blood-stained blade from
the place of occurrence in course of inspection on the basis of
disclosure of the accused. He had found that the grass at the place
of occurrence were in damaged condition from which it appeared
that the occurrence had taken place there. He had recorded the
statement of Sanjay Sharma who had taken the victim to the
hospital. PW-4 had collected the damaged grass from the place of
occurrence. He has proved the seizure list (Exhibit P-8). He sent
the appellant to G.M.C.H., Bettiah for medical examination. The
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.333 of 2023 dt.26-06-2025
14/19
doctor had taken the sample of front part of the penis of the
appellant on which the grass was present.
23. PW-4 has proved the seizure list of the seizure of the
pen drive in which the video footage of the recording showing the
victim girl sitting on the carrier of the bicycle which was riding by
the appellant. PW-4 has also proved the certificate issued by the
owner of the CCTV which has been marked Exhibit P-10. PW-4
had found injury on the neck and on the eyes of the victim. In his
cross-examination, PW-4 has stated that when he first saw the
victim in the hospital, the doctor was present with the victim. He
had conducted the inspection of the place of occurrence where for
the first time the victim had met the accused. PW-4 had seized the
bicycle of the accused from his house and also seized his clothes
which he was wearing, sealed them at the spot. He denied the
suggestion of the defence that the appellant had been falsely
implicated because of the dispute between the father of the victim
and the appellant on account of money transaction.
24. The another I.O. is Randhir Kumar Bhat (PW-5) who
had taken over the investigation from Manish Kumar (PW-4). He
got recorded the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C.
PW-5 had obtained the injury report of the victim from G.M.C.H.,
Bettiah and obtained the CDR of the mobile number which was in
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.333 of 2023 dt.26-06-2025
15/19
the name of the appellant. He has proved the CDR of the mobile
phone of the appellant which has been marked Exhibit P-13. In his
cross-examination, this witness was suggested that the FSL report
and the mobile call detail which he had submitted were fake, PW-
5, however, denied the suggestion.
25. Dr. Santosh Kumar (PW-6) has proved the injury
report of the victim as Exhibit P-14). He had found injuries on mid
of neck 9 cm x ½ cm x muscle deep on anterior aspect of neck.
The mode of injury was mentioned as sharp trauma and the nature
of the injury has been found grievous dangering to life. In his
cross-examination, he has stated that the dimension of the injury is
not superficial because it is three dimension injury.
26. In this case, the FSL report has been proved as
Exhibit P-12. The result of examination as available on Exhibit P-
12 reads as under:-
“1. Blood has been detected at places in the
exhibit marked ‘C’.
2. Blood detected in the exhibit marked ‘A/ii’
was too small for serological test.
3. Semen has been detected in the exhibit
marked ‘A/i’.
4. Blood could not be detected in the exhibits
marked ‘A/i’, ‘A/iii’, ‘A/iv’, ‘B’, ‘D’ and ‘E’.
5. Semen could not be detected in the exhibits
marked ‘A/ii’, ‘A/iii’, ‘A/iv’, ‘B’ ‘D’ and ‘E’.
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.333 of 2023 dt.26-06-2025
16/19
6. Grass could not be detected in the exhibit
marked ‘D’.
7. Opinion on other point could not be furnished
due to non availability of grass in the exhibit
marked ‘D’.”
27. It would appear from description of the articles
contained in the packet marked ‘A’, ‘B’ and the envelope marked
‘C’, ‘D’ and ‘E’ which read as under:-
“The packet marked as ‘A’ contained one
janghiya, one ganji, one shirt and one pants which
were further marked as i, ii, iii and iv respectively
in this laboratory.
1. The dirty dark chocolate brown colour janghiya
marked ‘A/i’ bore brownish stains. It also bore
greyish white stains which were stiff to feel and
which produced characteristic bluish white
fluorescence in ultra violet light.
2. The old torn white sando ganji marked ‘A/ii
bore a dot of reddish brown stain. It also bore
greyish stains which were neither stiff to feel nor
did they produce any characteristic bluish white
fluorescence in ultra violet light.
3. The blue full shirt marked ‘A/iii’ bore brownish
stains. It also bore greyish stains which were
neither stiff to feel nor did they produce any
characteristic bluish white fluorescence in ultra
violet light.
4. The old dirty khaki-green-brown-black printed
full pants marked ‘A/iv bore brownish stains. It
also bore greyish stains which were neither stiff to
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.333 of 2023 dt.26-06-2025
17/19feel nor did they produce any characteristic bluish
white fluorescence in ultra light.
5. The packet marked ‘B’ contained one old dirty
torn black leggings adhered with some grasses
which bore brownish stains. It also bore greyish
stains which were neither stiff to feel nor did they
produce any characteristic bluish white
fluorescence in ultra light.
6. The envelope marked ‘C’ contained one razor
blade which bore reddish brown stains at places.
7. The test tube marked ‘D’ contained one cotton
ball on plastic stick said to be penis swab which
bore brownish stains. It also bore greyish stains
which were neither stiff to feel nor did they
produce any characteristic bluish white
fluorescence in ultra violet light.
8. The envelope marked ‘E’ contained some dry
grasses which bore brownish stains. It also bore
greyish stains which were neither stiff to feel nor
did they produce any characteristic bluish white
fluorescence in ultra violet light.”
28. The injury report of the doctor which has been
marked Exhibit P-14 is being reproduced hereunder:-
“IW mid of neck 9 cm x ½ cm muscle deep on
anterior aspect of neck.
M.I.- Old cut scar mark Lt. Wrist.
Mode of Injury – Sharp or trauma
Nature of Injury – Grievous endangering to life.”
29. This Court further finds that while recording the
statement of the appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C., he was
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.333 of 2023 dt.26-06-2025
18/19
informed of the evidences brought by the prosecution against him
and that on his disclosure, the blade used in the occurrence, the
bicycle and the mobile were recovered were brought to his notice
which he denied. The appellant was called upon to say in his
defence, he pleaded innocence but has not stated about any enmity
with the father of the victim.
30. On perusal of the entire evidences on the record once
again, this Court finds that the learned trial court has duly
discussed the evidence of the victim and also considered the
defence of the appellant. The learned trial court has rightly
recorded that the accused is named in the crime and his name was
firstly taken by the victim in injured condition in the hospital
where she was being treated. This Court agrees with the views
expressed by the learned trial court that the victim has been
examined and cross-examined but the defence could not take any
contradiction in her statement.
31. To this Court, it appears that the victim in this case
has withstood the test of the cross-examination, her statements are
duly corroborated by the medical evidence and the recoveries
made by the I.O. from the place of occurrence. In fact, this Court
has noticed that the I.Os (PW-5) and (PW-6) were not suggested
by the defence that there was no recovery of the blood-stained
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.333 of 2023 dt.26-06-2025
19/19
blade and other materials from the place of occurrence. The I.Os
have duly established the prosecution case by proving the place of
occurrence and the circumstances which were found there at the
time of their inspection. On the face of the evidences available on
the record, we find no reason to take a different view from that of
the learned trial court. No ground for interference has been
established by the appellant.
32. In result, this appeal fails. It is dismissed
accordingly.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sushma2-Arvind/-
AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 01.07.2025 Transmission Date 01.07.2025