BASHEER AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioners herein are the three accused in C.C No.230/2002 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Perambra. They faced prosecution in the court below under Sections 120(b), 342, 509 and 506 (i) I.P.C, on the allegation that while a girl aged 20 years was returning home with her aunt after collecting firewood from the nearby estate, the three accused, as part of a design hatched by them, obstructed the ladies on the way, solicited sex from the girl by offering money to her aunt, and when the ladies resisted and attempted to escape in an autorickshaw , the accused obstructed the autorickshaw also and abused the ladies. The alleged incident happened at about 1 p.m on 25.12.2001 and the incident was reported by the girl to her mother. Though she made complaint to the Police without delay, no action was taken by the Police. In such a situation, she made a complaint before the Home Minister, and on the basis of the said complaint, a crime was registered on 25.2.2002. After investigation, the Police submitted final report in court.

(2.) The three accused appeared before the learned Magistrate and pleaded not guilty when the substance of the accusation was read over and explained to them. The prosecution examined eight witnesses including the victim and her aunt and proved Exts.P1 to P4 documents in the trial court. When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C,, 1973 the accused denied the incriminating circumstances and projected three different defences. One is that this is a false case foisted due to some animosity in connection with some labour dispute in the estate, the other is that the girl brought a false case for the reason that she was denied concession by the accused while travelling in their bus, and the 3rd defence is that the girl and her mother brought a prosecution only because something wrong done by the girl inside an autorickshaw was detected by the accused. The accused did not adduce any evidence in defence.

(3.) On an appreciation of the evidence, the learned Magistrate found the accused guilty under Sections 342, 509 and 506 (i) I.P.C. As regards the offence under Section 120(b) I.P.C, they were acquitted. On conviction, they were sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three months each under the three sections.