TUKARAM Vs. SRINIVAS ALIAS SEENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the appellants and the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is as follows- The complainant one Smt. Pooja W/o. Ravindra Prabhu Desai had alleged that on 18.06.2008 at about 12.30 a.m. when she was in her house along with her husband and the daughter aged 6 years, the accused namely, the appellants herein had knocked on the door and the complainant had switched on the light, then all the three appellants had barged into the house, the appellant No.1 was carrying a sword and he immediately assaulted the complainant's husband on his head and he was dragged out of the house by appellant Nos. 2 and 3, while appellant No.1 locked the door from inside and committed rape on the complainant, inspite of her stiff resistance. He wore a condom while committing the act. Thereafter, he said to have sat on her chest, removed the condom and inserted his penis in her mouth and thereafter ejaculated over her face. After the commission of the offence, the appellants had gone away threatening the complainant and her husband that they would face dire consequences if they reported the incident. The husband of the complainant and she spent the rest of the night weeping and in the morning at about 7 a.m. a complaint had been lodged with Vidyagiri Police Station against the accused. The police had sent the complainant to a Medical Practitioner for examination and the accused were apprehended. The clothes of appellant No.1 were seized and the complainant's vaginal smear was collected for Forensic Science Laboratory Examination. The police had then visited the house of the complainant to prepare the panchanama and recorded the statement of witnesses and collected other material for chemical analysis and on completion of their investigation filed a chargesheet against the accused. The Magistrate on taking cognizance had committed the case to the Sessions Court for trial. A Sessions case was accordingly registered, the presence of the accused was secured and after hearing both sides, the Court framed charges for the offences punishable under Sections 451, 323, 341, 376, 377, 506 and 114 read with Section 34 of the the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'I.P.C.', for brevity). The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined 22 witnesses and marked 25 documents and 17 material objects. The Court below, on hearing the rival contentions and on the basis of the material evidence, framed the following points for consideration-

(3.) The point Nos. 1 to 3 were held in the affirmative and the Court sentenced the accused to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000.00 each for the offence punishable under Sec. 451 read with Sec. 34 of I.P.C. and sentenced them to undergo simple imprisonment for one month for the offence punishable under Sec. 341 read with Sec. 34 of I.P.C. and simple imprisonment for one year for the offence punishable under Sec. 506 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. The accused No.1 was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000.00 for the offence punishable under Sec. 376 of I.P.C. Accused No.1 was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000.00 for the offence punishable under Sec. 377 read with Section 511 of I.P.C. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000.00 each for the offence punishable under Sec. 376 read with Sec. 114 of I.P.C. They were also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000.00 each for the offence under Sec. 377 read with Sections 511 and 114 of I.P.C. The sentences were to run concurrently. They were given a set off in respect of the time spent in custody. It is that which is under challenge in the present appeal.