ANIL AND ORS. Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE appeals are directed against the impugned judgment and order on sentence dated 27.11.2012 and 17.12.2012 respectively wherein the appellants namely Anil @ Balir, Vijay and Vinay Kumar stood convicted under Section 376(2)(g) of the IPC i.e. for the offence of gang rape. Each of them had been sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/ - and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for 3 years. Accused Anil @ Balir and Vinay had also been convicted under Sections 506/34 of the IPC for which the sentence imposed upon them was SI 2 years and a fine of Rs. 5,000 and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI 6 months. Accused Vijay was also convicted under Sections 366/341 of the IPC for which the sentence imposed upon him was SI 10 years and a fine of Rs. 5,000/ - and in default of payment of fine, to undergo SI for 3 years for the two offences respectively. Benefit of Section 428 of the Cr.PC had been granted to the appellants.

(2.) THE version of the prosecution was that on 16.06.2010 DD No. 19 -A was got recorded by Mishri Devi (PW -7), the mother of the victim relating to an incident of gang rape having been committed by Anil @ Balir, Vijay and Vinay Kumar upon her daughter. Separate statement of the victim (PW -3) was recorded. Criminal law was set into motion. In the course of investigation, the victim was medically examined. Her MLC was prepared; her hymen was found torn. Exhibits which included her vaginal swab, blood samples and clothes were seized and sealed and sent to the CFSL for examination. The blood samples and the clothes of the appellants had also been seized. The CFSL vide its report (Ex.PW -13/A) had opined that there was blood detected on the salwar of the victim; semen stains were also detected on her half torn kurta as also her vaginal swab; semen stains were also detected upon the underwear of accused Vijay and the nicker of Anil @ Balir.

(3.) IN view of the aforenoted evidence, both oral and documentary, the appellants were convicted and sentenced as aforenoted.