RANJIT MAITRY Vs. STATE OF C.G.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 27.2.2009 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (FTC) Raigarh, in Sessions Trial No. 07/ 2008 convicting the accused/Appellant No. 1 under Sections 506B, 363, 342 and 376 Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years under Section 506B, rigorous imprisonment for seven years with fine of Rs. 500 under Section 363, pay fine of Rs. 1000 under Section 342 and rigorous imprisonment for ten years with fine of Rs. 1000 under Section 376 Indian Penal Code; and convicting Appellant No. 2 under Section 506A, 363 and 342 Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to pay fine of Rs. 1000 under Section 506A, undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years with fine of Rs. 500 under Section 363 and pay fine of Rs. 1000 under Section 342 Indian Penal Code plus default stipulations.

(2.) Case of the prosecution in brief is that on 31.8.2007 at about 12.30 p.m. FIR Ex. P-1 was lodged by the prosecutrix (PW-1) aged about 14 years at the relevant time stating that on 24.8.2007 she had gone to village pond along with her aunt Kalavati (PW-5) and when her aunt was taking bath in the said pond, she was sitting in the bathing ghat. At that time accused/Appellant No. 1 Ranjit came there and asked her to accompany him to Raigarh and when she refused for that, he started abusing her. Thereafter, accused/Appellant No. 2 Sanatan Chouhan also came there and asked her to accompany him but she refused his offer also. On this, he also abused her and threatened of her life. Thereafter, it is alleged that both the accused/Appellants started dragging her and when she raised an alarm, they pressed her mouth and took her to a vacant house of some old man and after dumping her there they locked the room from out side and told her to get back at 9.30 p.m. Then at about 9.30 p.m. both of them got back thereto and took her to Bhupdevpur railway station and made her board the train. Thereafter, accused/Appellant No. 2 Sanatan left the place whereas accused/Appellant No. 1 Ranjit took her to his sister's house at Raigarh where his sister Mona and brother-in-law Sant Lal were there. It is alleged that in the night after his sister Mona and brother-in-law Sant Lal went to sleep, accused/Appellant No. 1 Ranajit committed forcible sexual intercourse. It is alleged that in the morning she requested him to take her to Bhupdevpur and when he refused to do so, she asked him to leave at her aunt's house at Baroudh. Thereafter, at about 6 a.m. she and the accused/Appellant No. 1 went to bus stand on foot and by catching bus they reached Baroudh at about 8.30 a.m. It is also alleged that as the accused/Appellant No. 1 had asked her not to disclose the incident of rape to anyone, she introduced him to her aunt to be her uncle and that after taking breakfast he left the house of her aunt. It is alleged that she stayed at her aunt's house at Baroudh from 25.8.2007 to 27.8.2007 and on 28.8.2007 she came back to village Bhupdevpur and on 30.8.2007 she disclosed the incident to her sister Maya and aunt Charanmati and then the report was lodged. Based on this FIR, offences under Sections 294, 506, 324, 363 and 376/34 Indian Penal Code were registered against the accused/ Appellants. After investigation, challan was filed by the police on 28.10.2007.

(3.) So as to hold the accused/Appellants guilty, the prosecution has examined 19 witnesses in support of its case. Statements of the accused/ Appellants were also recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which they denied the charges levelled against them and pleaded their innocence and false implication in the case.