SANTHOSH MOOLYA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE two sisters (both victims of rape), who were working in the quarry of one Subhash Jain and being the residents of Badaga Mijaru Village, ashwathapura Santhekatte, on 2-6-2004, after completing their work, were waiting for the bus near Sampige of Puttige Village by the side of the road to go to their place and it was around 6. 00 p. m. and at that time, the appellants herein came there in an autorikshaw which was driven by A-1 Santhosh Moolya and the auto stopped in front of the two sisters and then, A-1 called the two sisters to get into the auto as the two accused were going towards Ashwathapura side. Accordingly, both the sisters sat in the auto and A-2 surendra Gowda sat by their side and A-1 was driving the autorikshaw. There was rain coming at that time and the autorikshaw was taken towards a lonely place after leaving the main road and moved in the kachcha road. The two sisters, out of fear, asked the two accused as to where the auto was being taken. By that time, the auto came to a halt at a lonely place and the accused persons pulled the two sisters out of the autorikshaw and after covering their mouth with hands, the accused threatened to kill the two sisters if they gave rise to any shouting. Thereafter, both the sisters were made to lie on the ground and their clothes were removed. A-1 had forcible intercourse with the elder sister and A-2 did the same with the younger sister. Despite the efforts made by the two sisters to avoid from being raped by the two accused, they could not succeed and, after the forcible intercourse, the accused, while leaving the place, threatened the sisters by telling them that they will have to allow the accused to do the similar act of having intercourse with the two sisters even in the future, failing which the two sisters would be done to death, and they also threatened the sisters not to inform anybody about the incident. After the accused left the scene of offence, the two sisters managed to get up and put on their clothes and walked to their house and informed about the incident to their mother. It is also the complaint version that the two sisters were seen by Yamunappa while they boarded the autorikshaw in which the two accused came near the bus stop and picked the two sisters. The reason for lodging the formal complaint with the police is also stated in the complaint as the life threat given by the accused.

(2.) FOLLOWING the complaint being lodged as per Ex. P. 1 before P. W. 13 Ithappa, F. S. 1. , as case was registered in Crime No. 62/2004 for the offence punishable under sections 376 and 506 read with 34 of the I. P. C. against the two accused and the F. I. R. was sent as per Ex. P-9 to the Court. P. W. 12 pushparaj carried the F. I. R. and delivered it to the Magistrate. P. W. 16 took up the investigation and recorded the statements of the witnesses including P. W. 14, mother of the victims, and also had the spot panchanama conducted as per Ex. P-2 in the presence of the panch witness P. W. 9 and the autorikshaw was also seized from its owner P. W. 6 under panchanama Ex. P-4. The victims were subjected to the medical examination by P. W. 7 dr. Vijaya, who issued the reports as per Exs. P-5 and P-6 respectively after examining the two victims, P. W. 1 - elder sister, and P. W. 2-younger sister. After collecting the sketch map of the scene of offence through the engineer p. W. 11 U. Ravindra Kini as per Ex. P-8 and recording the statement of the quarry owner p. W. 4 Subhash Jain, under whom the victims were working, and that of P. W. 5 nonayya Gowda, a worker of the quarry where the two sisters were also working, and that of P. W. 15 Kishore, who confirmed the occupation of A-2 as the trailer driver, and on completion of the entire investigation, P. W. 16 submitted the charge-sheet against the two accused.

(3.) AS the accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charge framed against them, the prosecution examined in all 16 witnesses, most of whom have been referred to above, and on being questioned under Section 313 of the Cr. P. C. , the two accused denied the prosecution case in its entirety and the only stand taken by them in reply to the last question put to them was that there was enmity between the father of the accused and P. W. 4 subhash Jain, the quarry owner, and therefore, out of enmity factor, a false case has been filed against the two accused. On their part, the accused did not choose to lead any evidence. In the course of the entire evidence, the prosecution, apart from examining the 16 witnesses, got marked the documents Exs. P-1 to P-9 and M. Cs. 1 to 5 were the material objects produced in support of the prosecution case.