ARJUN SINGH THAKUR Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these appeals are being heard and decided together as the accused/appellant is one and the alleged date of incident is 11/02/2016, wherein the rape was committed with two prosecutrix, for which simultaneous trial was conducted by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Durg.

(2.) CRA No.53 of 2021 arises out of judgment dtd. 24/11/2020 passed in Sessions Trial No.119/2016 by the First Additional Sessions Judge, FTC, Durg, C.G. and CRA No.77 of 2021 arises out of judgment dtd. 24/11/2020 passed in Sessions Trial No.118/2016 by the same Sessions Judge. In both the trial, the evidence was recorded in continuity and eventually in both the cases the appellant was separately convicted for offence under Sec. 376 (2) (V) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo RI for life (till the natural death) and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000.00 in each case, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for two months. Being aggrieved by both the judgments, the appellant has preferred these two appeals.

(3.) Brief facts of this case are that two reports bearing Cr.No.50/2016 and 49/2016) were lodged on 12/02/2016 (Ex. P/1) that the prosecutrix were suffering with certain ailments and the appellant who was stated to be a Baiga came to the house and offered treatment to respite from the ailment. Pursuant thereto both the prosecutrix, who are cousin sisters, were sent along with the appellant for exorcism (jhaad-phoonk). Having repose confidence upon the appellant, both the girls were sent along with the appellant at about 7.30 PM and accused took them to a field near a cremation ground and offered them rice mixed with certain things. Thereafter, both the girls lost their consciousness and it was stated that while they were in semiconscious state, taking advantage of such situation, the appellant committed rape on them. The victims out of fear did not object to such act. The appellant further told the prosecutrix not to disclose these facts to any of the family members, however, after the prosecutrix came back to their house, they disclosed about the incident to their Mama (maternal uncle). Thereafter, two separate reports were lodged.