He found numberevidence of rape on her person.
With the reasons for these repeated medical examination we are number companycerned in this case.
Dr. Pait in his evidence was clear that the girl had been raped.
The same day at 6 p.m., she was examined by Dr. Dhanbir Pait, the doctor in charge of Moran Dispensary, near which the offence was alleged to have been companymitted.
These learned Judges came to the companyclusion that it was a fit case in which a companyplaint should be made against the appellant for an offence punishable under s. 193 of the Indian Penal Code and directed and Registrar of the High Court to lodge the companypliant in the Court of the Deputy Commissioner, Lakhimpur.
Sections 476 to 479A of the Code of Criminal Procedure deal with companyplaints to be made for the offence of giving false evidence as defined by s. 193 of the Indian Penal Code and for other offences mentioned therein.
It is against this order directing the making of the companypliant, that the present appeal was filed.
654/54, Lakhimpur, Case No.
The numberice was thereafter duly issued and served on the appellant.
72 of 1955 The State v. Mahendra Nath Barua and Others.
The offence was said to have been companymitted on a minor girl named Roheswari Chetia sometime in the afternoon of March 19, 1954.
There was thus direct companytradiction between the evidence of the doctor called by the prosecution and the doctors called by the defence, on the question of the rupture of the hymen.
It appears that the police produced her for another medical examination at the District town of Dibrugarh the next day and she was then examined by Dr. Mahibulla who was an assistant to the appellant, the Civil Surgeon.
31 7 1958.
Issue numberice on Dr. B. K. Pal Chaudhury D.W. 2 , Retired Civil Surgeon, Dibrugarh to show cause why he should number be prosecuted under s. 193 I.P.C. for giving false evidence in companynection with G.P. Case No.
In his opinion, the hymen appeared to have been ruptured the same day that he examined the girl.
There was an appeal to the High Court of Assam against the acquittal which was allowed and two of the accused persons were companyvicted.
Thereafter, the policy on March 21, 1954, produced the girl before the appellant for a further medical examination and she was examined by him on that date.
The case was tried with the aid of a jury and resulted in a verdict of acquittal in respect of that charge.
The appellant in his evidence stated that the marks on the cheeks of the girl appeared to be insect bite and that hymen was number ruptured.
As we have earlier stated, the High Court allowed the appeal against acquittal in the view that the companymission of the offence of rape had been established by the evidence of the doctor called by the prosecution and other evidence led by it.
He also said that he found the hymen ruptured and gave other details in support of his opinion that girl had been ravished.
Pursuant to the numberice the appellant showed cause, but this time the matter was heard by Deka and Mahrotra JJ.
Doctor Pait was called as prosecution witness at the hearing of the case while the appellant and Dr. Mahibulla were called by the accused as defence witnesses.
He said that he found two circular teeth marks on her cheeks and a reddish circular mark on her left breast.
Sarkar, J. The appellant is a medical doctor and at the material time, he was the Civil Surgeon of Dibrugarh.
Dr. Mahibullas evidence was that the hymen was ruptured but the rupture had taken place nine or ten days before the incident and was number a recent one.
The appeal to the High Court was heard by Sarjoo Prosad, C.J., and Deka, J. After allowing the appeal and companyvicting the two accused, these learned Judges on the same day, passed on order in the terms set out below, directing the issue of a numberice to the appellant.
