Patna High Court
Atendra ThakurversusThe State Of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SHAILENDRA SINGH
Holding
The conviction under Section 376 read with Section 511 of the IPC is upheld as the evidence, including the victim’s statement and corroborative testimony, is reliable and sufficient.
Summary
The appellant, Atendra Kumar, was convicted for attempting to rape an 11‑year‑old girl on 14 April 2012 in a wheat field near her village. The victim testified that the appellant chased her, caught hold of her, pushed her to the ground, and tried to open her pants before villagers intervened and the police arrested him. The trial court relied primarily on the victim’s statement, corroborated by relatives and an investigating officer, and sentenced him to five years rigorous imprisonment, a fine and an additional year simple imprisonment. On appeal, the appellant argued that the investigation was faulty and that the case was fabricated due to a dispute over unpaid barber services. The High Court held that the FIR and the victim’s testimony were natural and reliable, the corroborative evidence sufficient, and the appellant’s defence unsubstantiated, thereby upholding the conviction. The appeal was dismissed and the appellant’s bail cancelled, directing him to surrender and serve the sentence.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR and the victim’s contemporaneous statement are reliable and sufficient to sustain a conviction under Section 376 read with Section 511 of the IPC.
- Whether the investigation deficiencies and the appellant’s claim of false implication negate the prosecution’s case.
- Whether the evidence establishes the act as an attempt to commit rape within the meaning of Section 376 read with Section 511.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 313
- Indian Penal Code — s. 376, 511
Subjects
- attempted rape
- IPC 376
- Section 511
- FIR reliability
- criminal appeal
- evidence corroboration
- investigation deficiencies
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.297 of 2014
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-39 Year-2012 Thana- PARSABAZAR District- Patna
======================================================
Atendra Thakur, S/o- Munna Thakur, R/o village- Suitha, P.S.- Parsa Bazar,
District – Patna.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Saroj Kumar Choudhary, Amicus Curiae
For the State : Mr. Syed Ashfaque Ahmad, APP
For the Informant : None.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
CAV JUDGMENT
Date : 03-02-2026
The present criminal appeal has been preferred by
the appellant, Atendra Kumar, against the judgment of
conviction dated 16.04.2014 and the order of sentence dated
23.04.2014 passed by the Court of Ad hoc Additional District &
Sessions Judge-I, Patna, in Sessions Trial No. 638/2012 arising
out of Parsa Bazar P.S. Case No. 39 of 2012, G.R. No. 1708 of
2012, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been convicted
for the offence under Section 376 read with Section 511 of the
Indian Penal Code (in short, ‘IPC’), and he has been sentenced
to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years with a fine of
Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand), and in default of payment
of fine, he has further been directed to undergo simple
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.297 of 2014 dt. 03-02-2026
2/20
imprisonment for one year.
Prosecution story :-
2. The prosecution story, in brief, is as under :-
The informant, who is the victim herself (hereinafter
referred to as ‘victim’), alleged that on 14.04.2012 at about
04:10 P.M., she went to the coaching centre run by one Gunjan
Master, situated at village- Palanga Bagicha. After attending the
coaching, she was returning alone to her home, when she saw
the appellant coming from behind on a bicycle. Thereafter, when
she reached near a ridge leading to her village, she left the road
and chose a shortcut way to reach the village. After that the
appellant started following her after leaving his bicycle in a
field. The victim further alleged that when the appellant started
following her, she, on account of being alone, started running,
but the appellant chased and caught hold of her, closed her
mouth by placing his hand, and pushed her to the ground of a
wheat field with an intention to rape her. The victim further
alleged that during the course of committing the occurrence, the
appellant fell upon her body and tried to open her pant, but
when she cried, some people started arriving at that place.
Thereafter, the appellant tried to flee, but he was caught hold by
those persons. The appellant was assaulted by the gathered
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.297 of 2014 dt. 03-02-2026
3/20
people, and thereafter, the police were informed through mobile
communication. After that the Station House Officer (SHO) and
other police officials arrived there. As per the victim, she
recorded her fardbeyan at 06:45 P.M. before the Assistant Sub-
Inspector (ASI), namely Din Bandhu Ram, of Parsa Bazar
Police Station. On that basis, the formal FIR was registered
bearing Parsa Bazar P.S. Case No. 39 of 2012 for the offence
under Section 376 read with Section 511 of IPC, that set the
criminal law in motion.
2.1. Here, it is relevant to mention that at the time of
recording the fardbeyan, the victim’s maternal grandparents,
who were examined as PW-2 and PW-3, and one Santosh
Kumar (PW-1), were also present, who made their signatures
upon the fardbeyan.
3. After completion of the investigation, the police
charge-sheeted the appellant for the same offence under which
the FIR had been registered, and thereafter, the concerned
Magistrate took cognizance of the said offence and committed
the case of the appellant to the Court of Sessions for trial vide
order dated 06.06.2012.
4. The appellant stood charged for the offence under
Section 376 read with Section 511 of IPC, that was read over
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.297 of 2014 dt. 03-02-2026
4/20
and explained to him, to which he denied and claimed to be
tried for the charged offence.
5. During the trial, the prosecution examined
altogether six witnesses, who are as under :-
PW-1 Santosh Kumar An independent person
PW-2 Chhatthu Singh Maternal grandfather of the victim
PW-3 Shakuntala Devi Maternal grandmother of the victim
PW-4 Rajnish Kumar Maternal uncle of the victim
PW-5 XXXX Victim
PW-6 Din Bandhu Ram Investigating Officer
6. In documentary evidence, the prosecution proved
and exhibited the following documents, which are as under :-
Ext-1 The signature of Chhatthu Singh (PW-2) on the informant’s
fardbeyan
Ext-1/1 The signature of Shakuntala Devi (PW-3) on the informant’s
fardbeyan
Ext-1/2 The signature of the informant on the fardbeyan
7. After completion of the prosecution evidence, the
statement of the appellant was recorded under Section 313 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, ‘Cr.P.C.’), giving him
an opportunity to explain all the material circumstances
appearing against him from the prosecution evidence, which
were denied by him. While recording the statement, the
appellant claimed himself to be innocent; however, he did not
take any specific defence in his statement.
8. The appellant did not give any defence evidence,
either in oral or documentary form.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.297 of 2014 dt. 03-02-2026
5/20
9. While convicting the appellant, the learned trial
court mainly placed reliance upon the victim’s own evidence.
Though the evidence of the victim’s maternal grandparents
(PW-2 and PW-3) was deemed to be hearsay with regard to the
commission of the occurrence, the learned trial court took their
evidence as supportive of some material facts of the prosecution
story, such as the date and time of occurrence, the place of
occurrence, and the factum of the appellant’s apprehending on
the spot by the villagers. As far as the non-recovery of the
material objects, such as the appellant’s bicycle and the victim’s
study materials, which are said to have been left by the accused
and the victim at the spot during the course of the occurrence, is
concerned, the learned trial court did not take it as fatal to the
prosecution case, as the same was considered to be a fault of the
investigating officer during the investigation, for which the
prosecution should not be made to suffer.
10. Mr. Saroj Kumar Choudhary, learned amicus
curiae and Mr. Syed Ashfaque Ahmad, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State, are present and they are heard.
Submissions by learned amicus curiae :-
11. Learned amicus curiae has submitted that the
investigation made by the investigating officer to investigate the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.297 of 2014 dt. 03-02-2026
6/20
truthfulness of the occurrence, remained faulty as firstly, the
investigating officer did not make an attempt to verify the
victim's coaching center and in this regard, no independent
person was examined, the fellow students of the same coaching
center or the location of the coaching center and even the
concerned person who was running the said coaching center,
was not investigated and examined. It came in the evidence of
the victim that the victim used to go to coaching center alone
from her village without any companion student, which
ordinarily does not happen in the rural areas. Before the trial
court, the victim deposed that the appellant did not come to the
house of her maternal grandparents as he was not paid for his
professional service (barber work) by her maternal relatives
whenever the service of the appellant was sought, which shows
that there was no good relation between the appellant and the
family of the victim's maternal grandparents and the same is
relevant to the appellant's defence taken by him before the trial
court. On the fardbeyan, neither the victim's signature nor the
signatures of other witnesses, who accompanied the victim to
the police station when the victim's fardbeyan was recorded,
have the details of the date when they made their signatures.
Learned amicus curiae has further submitted that as per the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.297 of 2014 dt. 03-02-2026
7/20
prosecution story narrated by the victim herself, upon hearing
her cry, some nearby people working in nearby fields rushed to
the spot and caught hold of the appellant on the spot and those
people were the independent persons and also reliable persons
to support the allegations of the victim but none of them was
examined by the investigating officer, so, the case of the
prosecution completely depends upon the evidence of the
relative witnesses of the victim, who accepted in their testimony
that they did not see the commission of the alleged occurrence.
The investigating officer (PW-6) deposed before the trial court
that he did not find the appellant's bicycle and the victim's
books, pen, etc., (study materials) at the alleged spot of crime
while as per the case of prosecution, the appellant left his
bicycle in a field before rushing towards the victim and at the
time of alleged occurrence, the victim was returning from her
coaching center after attending class but no finding of any study
material at the place of occurrence by the investigating officer
goes against the said story of the prosecution. It has been further
submitted that the victim (PW-5) and her relatives (PW-2 &
PW-3) deposed before the trial court that the appellant did not
have good character and used to enter into the houses of any
person with bad intention and on several occasions, he was
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.297 of 2014 dt. 03-02-2026
8/20
caught hold by the villagers and punished in panchayat meetings
but in this regard, there is no evidence except the testimony of
the victim and her close relatives and further, the investigating
officer deposed that in the police station there was no any
complaint or case against the appellant prior to the registration
of the FIR of the present matter, which goes against the
prosecution's claim as to the appellant having no good character
during the relevant period of occurrence.
Submissions by learned APP :-
12. On the other hand, learned APP appearing for the
State has argued that at the time of commission of the attempt to
rape, the victim was admittedly alone and in this regard, the FIR
itself is evident. The date and time of occurrence and the place
of occurrence as disclosed by the victim gets corroboration from
other prosecution witnesses, particularly, from the evidence of
PW-2, PW-3, PW-4 and investigating officer (PW-6), and to the
said extent, the evidence of these witnesses appear to be highly
corroborative to the prosecution story. As far as the boundaries
of the alleged place of occurrence are concerned, the
investigating officer deposed before the trial court that during
the course of investigation the victim’s maternal grandfather
(PW-2) supported the description of the boundaries as given by
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.297 of 2014 dt. 03-02-2026
9/20
the victim herself. As the victim did not sustain any bodily
injury, therefore, there was no need to place her for medical
examination by the investigating officer and in this regard, the
evidence of the investigating officer is important and the victim
herself accepted before the trial court that she did not sustain
any injury when the appellant tried to rape her. As far as the case
of the attempt to rape is concerned, it is submitted by learned
APP that the appellant firstly pushed the victim on the wheat
field and thereafter tried to open the victim’s pant, which clearly
shows the appellant’s intention to commit rape with the victim
and he was about to commit rape with the victim but upon
hearing her cry, the nearby people rushed and caught hold of the
appellant when he was trying to flee away. Therefore, the
appellant has been rightly convicted for the attempt to rape
under section 376 read with section 511 of IPC.
13. Learned APP further submitted that the appellant’s
main defence as to the reason of false implication of him by the
victim, as revealed by the appellant while cross-examining the
prosecution witnesses, was not supported by any of the
prosecution witnesses when they were cross-examined. On this
aspect, all the prosecution witnesses, particularly, the victim
herself, her maternal grandparents and her maternal uncle did
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.297 of 2014 dt. 03-02-2026
10/20
not say anything about the said bad relation between the
appellant and their family on account of alleged non-payment of
the service charge whenever the professional service had been
rendered by the appellant in the family of the victim’s maternal
grandparents.
14. It has been lastly submitted by learned APP that
the fardbeyan of the victim was recorded immediately at the
spot by the police official ASI (I.O/PW-6) and the same gets
support from his evidence and other material witnesses of the
prosecution and the FIR was registered within three hours of the
commission of the alleged occurrence, which shows reliability
and naturality of the FIR and further, the appellant did not
succeed to show any cogent reason on the part of the victim or
her maternal relatives to fabricate a false case involving the
modesty of a 11 year old minor girl.
Consideration and Analysis :-
15. I have heard both the sides, perused the judgment
impugned and the evidences available on the record of the trial
court and also the statement of the appellant. At first, I come to
the reliability of the FIR. As per the prosecution story, the
alleged occurrence of the attempt to rape upon the victim took
place in the evening at 6:00 P.M., on 14.04.2012, in a wheat
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.297 of 2014 dt. 03-02-2026
11/20
field when the victim was returning to her home from a
coaching centre. The victim’s fardbeyan was recorded at 6:45
P.M. on that very day at the spot by the Assistant Sub-Inspector
Din Bandhu Ram (PW-6), and that was supported by the PW-6
in his evidence. The formal FIR was registered at 9:00 P.M. on
that very day, so, there was only three hours gap between the
commission of the alleged occurrence and the institution of the
formal FIR and during the course of that three hours, as per the
case of the prosecution, the appellant was caught hold by the
villagers when he was trying to escape and thereafter, the police
was informed and he was handed over to the police and these
events as well as the distance of the police station from the place
of occurrence, are sufficient to justify the delay of 3 hours in the
registration of the formal FIR and further, the fardbeyan was
recorded by the victim immediately at the alleged place of
occurrence. Accordingly, the FIR based on the fardbeyan of the
victim appears to be natural and reliable without any
afterthought. As per the case of the prosecution, the victim was
alone when the appellant tried to commit rape upon her, so, in
such a situation, the victim appears to be the sole eyewitness of
the commission of the occurrence, so, the case of the
prosecution entirely depends on her evidence. Hence, at first, I
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.297 of 2014 dt. 03-02-2026
12/20
would like to discuss the evidence of the victim, who was
examined as PW-5. Before going to the evidence of the victim, I
would like to point out the material facts appearing from the
prosecution story narrated by the victim in her fardbeyan. First,
the place of occurrence which is said to be a wheat field situated
nearby the village road, the second is the time of occurrence
which is said to be at 6:00 P.M., the third is the date of
occurrence which is said to be 14.04.2012 and the fourth
material fact is that at the time of occurrence the victim was
returning from a coaching centre after taking tuition and the
appellant was coming on his bicycle and the fifth and last
material fact is that the appellant was caught hold by the
villagers, who were working in nearby fields and rushed to the
place of occurrence upon hearing the cry of the victim, and after
catching hold of the appellant the police was informed and he
was handed over to the police. The first five facts are the most
important part of the evidence of the victim. The victim deposed
in her examination-in-chief that the incident took place on
14.04.2012 in the evening at about 6:00 P.M. At that time, she
was returning on her foot after taking tuition from one, namely
Gunjan Master, and when she saw the appellant coming on his
bicycle, she left the village road after crossing the ridge and
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.297 of 2014 dt. 03-02-2026
13/20
opted for a shortcut way to reach her maternal grandparents’
house but the appellant started following her after leaving his
bicycle in a field and ran after her upon finding her alone and
thereafter, he caught hold of her and pushed her down to the
wheat field and climbed upon her body, pressed her mouth and
tried to open her pant but anyhow she (the victim) managed to
remove the appellant’s hand from her mouth and started crying,
upon which nearby people began running towards the appellant
and victim. Thereafter, the appellant started fleeing but he was
caught hold by the gathered people near the place of occurrence
in the same field. The victim further deposed in her
examination-in-chief that upon seeing her condition, the
gathered people started assaulting the appellant however, in the
meantime the police arrived and interrogated her and also
recorded her statement. Thereafter, she and the appellant along
with her maternal relatives and one person belonging to her
village, were taken to the police station by the police in a jeep
where her beyan (statement) was again recorded.
16. While recording the statements in the
examination-in-chief, the victim identified the appellant, who
was present in the court room at that time. The victim also
identified her signature upon her fardbeyan on seeing it and
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.297 of 2014 dt. 03-02-2026
14/20
stated that before signing upon the fardbeyan, she had read the
same. The victim’s signature was marked as ‘Ext-1/2’. On all
these relevant and important facts of the prosecution story, the
victim was cross-examined at length by the defence. She
deposed in her cross-examination that she knew the appellant
for a long time on account of his profession. She further stated
that when the appellant was following her, she was alone and
she recorded her statement at the police station and thereafter,
she returned back. She next stated that her medical examination
was not done by the police. She deposed in her cross-
examination that the police did not seize anything from the
place of occurrence. Regarding the main part of the occurrence
pertaining to the attempt to rape, upon being cross-examined,
she stated in the paragraph No. 9 that the appellant tried to open
her pant but he did not succeed to commit anything wrong with
her and during course of that occurrence, she did not sustain any
scratch or injury.
17. All the facts as stated above by the victim in her
cross-examination are completely supportive to the prosecution
story narrated by the victim in her fardbeyan, which was a
natural statement of the victim. Though the police did not seize
any material object, such as, the appellant’s bicycle and the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.297 of 2014 dt. 03-02-2026
15/20
victim’s study materials like her books, coaching bag, etc.,
however, in this regard, the evidence of the investigating officer
seems to be some explanatory. The investigating officer,
examined as PW-6, deposed in his cross-examination that he
reached at the place of occurrence in the night at about 8 P.M.
As per the case of the prosecution, upon hearing the cry of the
victim, several nearby people rushed to the spot and gathered
there, so, in such a situation, in the presence of several persons
on an open field in the night, the appellant’s bicycle and the
victim’s study materials could have been found only if a serious
search attempt was made by the investigating officer but the
investigating officer’s evidence shows that no such attempt was
made by him and in this regard, he remained some careless but
merely by this fact, the credibility of the prosecution story
cannot be disbelieved in entirety. As far as the above mentioned
five material facts are concerned, which mainly relate to the
time, date and place of occurrence, the factum of appellant’s
apprehending by the gathered people, the information given to
the police by the gathered people and thereafter, the arrival of
the police and recording the fardbeyan of the victim at the spot
and handing over the appellant to the police by the said people,
the evidence of PW-2, PW-3 and PW-4, is important and
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.297 of 2014 dt. 03-02-2026
16/20
relevant. All these witnesses fully supported the above facts and
deposed before the trial court that when they reached at the
place of occurrence, they found the appellant in captivity of the
villagers and thereafter the police arrived and recorded the
statement of the victim and others, and the appellant who had
been caught hold by the villagers, was handed over to the
police. All these facts and circumstances are important as the
same, according to the prosecution; happened just after the
commission of the alleged occurrence of the attempt to rape and
in this regard, the evidence of these witnesses is fully supportive
and corroborative to the victim’s story narrated by her in the
fardbeyan.
18. As far as the main defence taken by the appellant
before the trial court is concerned, there is nothing to support
the same. The appellant mainly took the defence that there was
no good relation between him and the victim’s maternal family
as he was not paid for the service which had been rendered by
him to the victim’s maternal relatives, owing to which a false
story was fabricated by the maternal relatives of the victim with
the help of a minor girl (victim). I do not find force in the said
defence as all the material witnesses whose evidence was
important to the said defence, among them, PW-2, PW-3 and
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.297 of 2014 dt. 03-02-2026
17/20
PW-4, including the victim (PW-5), denied the suggestion
pertaining to said defence when the same was put to them by the
defence during the course of cross-examination and they
deposed that it was wrong to say that on account of bad relation
running between the appellant and the victim’s maternal family
members due to non-payment of service rendered by the
appellant to them, a false case was fabricated. Furthermore, the
appellant’s said defence does not appear to be believable and the
same cannot be a reason for persuading the old grandparents of
the victim to fabricate a false case involving the modesty of
their minor granddaughter, merely on account of a dispute of
non-payment of the professional service (barbering) rendered
by the appellant. Here, it is relevant to mention that the
investigating officer deposed that the appellant had no good
character as during the investigation the villagers revealed that
the appellant used to misbehave with women, for which
panchayat meetings had also been conveyed, in which the
panches had punished the appellant. Though the investigating
officer did not examine the panch or a person who participated
in the said panchayat meetings, however, the prosecution
witnesses (PW-2, PW-3 & PW-4), although they are the
relatives of the victim, supported the said alleged conduct of the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.297 of 2014 dt. 03-02-2026
18/20
appellant and the same goes in favour of the prosecution to
some extent.
19. Now, I am to examine the applicability of the
offence punishable under section 376 read with section 511 of
the IPC in the present matter. As per the story narrated by the
victim in her fardbeyan, the accused firstly followed her and
thereafter ran behind her in a field and pushed her to the ground
and climbed onto her body and started opening her pant but
during that course when the victim cried, the appellant tried to
escape upon seeing the people who ran to the place of
occurrence after hearing the cry of the victim. The victim
deposed almost similar story before the trial court in her
examination-in-chief and remained firm to her stand in the
cross-examination also. By these acts of the appellant as alleged
by the victim, it can be deemed that he had crossed the stage of
preparation and entered into the stage of attempting to commit
the offence of rape. As the appellant’s acts clearly demonstrate
the execution of his mens rea to rape the victim and his
preparation had come to an end on that very moment when he
pushed the victim to the ground on a wheat field and climbed
onto her body and tried to open her pant. Though he could not
succeed in committing sexual penetration, however, the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.297 of 2014 dt. 03-02-2026
19/20
appellant was about to commit rape upon the victim but could
not succeed on account of raising an alarm by the victim and
owing to the arrival of nearby people. As such, this Court finds
the trial court’s approach in framing the charge under section
376 read with section 511 of the IPC against the appellant and
convicting him for the same, to be correct. Accordingly, this
Court finds no illegality in the impugned judgment of
conviction and order of sentence and there is no merit in this
appeal, so, it stands dismissed.
20. The appellant is on bail, so, his bail bonds are
cancelled and he is directed to surrender before the trial court
within fifteen days from the date of receipt of this Judgment’s
copy by the trial court and serve the remaining part of the
sentence awarded upon him by the trial court. If the appellant
does not surrender within the fixed period then the learned trial
court shall take all necessary legal steps to get him in custody
and put him in jail so that he can serve the remaining part of his
sentence.
21. Let the judgment’s copy along with the trial
court’s record be sent immediately to the trial court for needful
compliance.
22. Mr. Saroj Kumar Choudhary, learned Amicus
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.297 of 2014 dt. 03-02-2026
20/20
Curiae shall be entitled to remuneration, as per notification
dated 18.05.2017 issued by the State Government, to be paid by
the Patna High Court Legal Services Committee for assisting
this Court as Amicus Curiae.
(Shailendra Singh, J)
annu/-
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE 28.01.2026
Uploading Date 03.02.2026
Transmission Date 03.02.2026
Checking your session…