SANDEEP BABURAO JADHAV Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been preferred by the accused being aggrieved by the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 19th January 2010 passed by the Fast Track and Additional Sessions Court, Hukkeri in Sessions Case No.206 of 2008.

(2.) Heard Sri. Srinand A. Pachchapure, learned counsel appearing for the accused/appellant and Sri Raja Raghavendra Naik, learned High Court Government Pleader representing the State.

(3.) Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 14.11.2007 at about 6.00 p.m., the victim was returning along with her mother and brother to her house after completing coolie work in the land at Naganure village. After proceeding to some distance, the brother of the complainant who was coming on the bicycle, has gone ahead leaving the victim and her mother. When the victim and her mother were coming near a temple, the accused who was also coming there threw chilli power in the eyes of the complainant and her mother and thereafter forcibly kidnapped the victim from that place. It is the further case of the prosecution that the accused took the victim by kidnapping her near a sugar factory and then in a tractor to Kamathnur gate and from there, he took her to Chikodi to a maize crop field land bearing Sy.No.297/1 and at about 9.00 pm, sexually assaulted her. Thereafter, he took the victim to the house of one CW.14-Hamida Baseerahmed Ganeshwadi. The accused sexually assaulted her at about 4.00 a.m. on 15.11.2007. Thereafter, the uncle of the accused came to know of the said fact and told the complainant that the accused has committed wrong and to excuse him and thereafter brought her to Sankeshwar Bus stand and left her there. Thereafter, the complainant returned to her house and told the incident to her mother and thereafter she went to the police station and filed a complaint. Based on the complaint, a case was registered in Crime No.228 of 2007. After investigation, a charge sheet was laid as against the accused. After filing of the charge sheet, learned Judicial Magistrate took cognizance and after following the formalities, committed the case to Sessions Court. The Sessions Court took cognizance and secured the presence of the accused and after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the accused, charge was framed. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried and as such trial was fixed.