GANESH Vs. STATE OF C. G.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the present appeals arise out of a common judgment, they are decided by this common judgment.

(2.) The appeals are preferred against the judgment dated 18.5.2001 passed by the Special Judge under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (henceforth The Act of 1989')/Additional Sessions Judge, Jagdalpur in Sessions Trial No. 493 of 2000 convicting and sentencing each of the accused/Appellants as under: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_49_LAWS(CHH)1_2018_1.html</FRM>

(3.) Facts of the case, in brief, are that in the night of 2.10.2000 at about 12:30 a.m., the prosecutrix (PW3), aged about 21 years, an unmarried girl and her friends Sukari, Phoolobai, Tilobai, Budhobai, Rameshwari, Malti, Ramesh, Dhalu and Laxman were coming back to their village after watching a dance ceremony. It is alleged that both the Appellants caught the prosecutrix and her girl friends. The Appellants showed knife and asked the boy friends of the prosecutrix to leave the place and thereafter both the Appellants committed forcible sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix. First Information Report (Ex.P12) was lodged by the prosecutrix on. 5.10.2000. The prosecutrix was medically examined by Dr. (Smt.) A. Kachh (PW1) on 6.10.2000. Her report is Ex.P1 in which she has stated that she did see any type of staining on the wearing clothes of the prosecutrix. She did see any mark of violence on any part of the body of the prosecutrix. She did see any staining on the pubic hairs. She did find any sign of discharge from the vagina of the prosecutrix. She did find any injury on the genitals. She found that the hymen of the prosecutrix was intact and lacerated. She found that only a little finger was admitting in the vagina of the prosecutrix and while insertion of the finger she complained of pain. It is opined by the doctor that there was no sign of complete sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix. As per the prosecution story, at the time of occurrence, the prosecutrix could identify the culprits. Later on, her boy friends Ramesh, Dhalu and Laxman told her that Jogi, Ganesh (Appellant), Lachhu and their friends had caught her. During investigation, on 7.10.2000, the prosecutrix identified both the Appellants vide identification memo (Ex.P11). Statements of witnesses were recorded under section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. On completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the Appellants under Sections 376(g) and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. Charges were framed against them under Section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code.