SUDHAKAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ms. Rakhi, a young girl of about 20 years of age was working as teacher in Zila Parishad Primary School at Banegaon, Maharashtra at a monthly salary of Rs. 300/-. The appellant No. 1 was the Headmaster and appellant No. 2 was a co-teacher in the same school. On one unfortunate morning of Saturday, the 9th of July, 1994 Ms. Rakhi went to her school in the morning as usual. When the school was closed at about 120 Clock in the afternoon and all students had gone back to their homes, the appellants came in the room where Rakhi was sitting and closed the door and windows of the room. She was forcibly subjected to sexual intercourse by the appellants and her wailing cries did not have any effect upon them. She was thus subjected to gang-rape by the appellants. After the incident Ms. Rakhi went to her house and narrated the incident to her mother Padmabai, brother Prakash and uncle Balasaheb alias Balaji. The incident was also narrated to the father of the prosecutrix who came back home after two-three days. The matter was reported to the police on 20th July, 1994. PW-15 API Laxman Wadje incharge police station Pathri recorded the statement of the prosecutrix and on that basis Crime Report No. 100/94 was registered. Petticoat of the prosecutrix and the metal bangles which she was wearing at the time of occurrence were seized. After preparation of Panchanama, the seized articles were sent to the Chemical Analyser for his report. On 6-8-1994 statements of two child witnesses, namely, Dnyaeshwar Mujmul and Dnyaneshwar Adhav were recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code before the Special Executive Magistrate. Ms. Rakhi was taken for medical examination to Dr. Gauri Rathod, PW-1 who reported that the prosecutrix had been subjected to sexual intercourse in the recent past. On completion of the investigation the charge-sheet was filed against both the appellants in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Pathri, who committed them to the Court of Sessions Judge to stand their trial for the offences under Section 376 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. After the matter was reported to the police, the prosecutrix was sent to stay with her married sister Saraswatibai PW-14 as it was found that she had lost her equilibrium of mind and was mentally upset.

(2.) Having failed to withstand the humiliation to which she was subjected to on account of rape committed by the appellants, Ms. Rakhi is stated to have committed suicide on 22nd December, 1994 at about 10.30 p.m. at the house of her sister Saraswatibai. Autopsy was conducted on the same date and the cause of death was reported as poisoning. In view of the subsequent development additional charge under Section 306 read with Section 34, I.P.C. was added against the appellants on 8-5-1995. Both the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined 18 witnesses. However, at the trial except PW-1 Gauri Rathod, PW-2 Padmabai, PW-3 Gangadhar, PW-12 Dr. Anandgaonkar, PW-13 Sanjay Deshpande, PW-14 Saraswatibai and PW-15 ASI Wadje, the other witnesses turned hostile. The Trial Judge of the Sessions Court, however, vide his judgment dated 12-7-1995 in Sessions Case No. 135/94 convicted the appellants under Section 376(2)(g) read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. and sentenced each one of them to suffer rigorous imprisonment of seven years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- each, in default of payment of fine, the appellants were directed to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for three months. The appellants were also convicted and sentenced for the offences punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34, I.P.C. and sent-enced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each, in default of payment of fine, they were to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month more. Both these sentences were directed to run concurrently. Criminal appeal filed by the appellants was dismissed vide the order impugned in this appeal. Not satisfied with the findings of the Courts below the appellants have preferred the present appeal with prayer for setting aside their conviction and sentence and acquitting them of the charges.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellants has submitted that though apparently the nature of the crime appears to be heinous, yet, in the circumstances of the case the appellants cannot be convicted and sentenced as according to him the prosecution has miserably failed to place any legal evidence against them. It is contended that the evidence relied upon by the Courts below is inadmissible in evidence. The prosecution is stated to have failed to explain the delay in lodging the First Information Report and getting the prosecutrix medically examined. It is submitted that in the absence of exact cause of death of Ms. Rakhi the appellants could not be held guilty for the commission of the crime punishable under Section 306, I.P.C.