REJU Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals are filed by accused 1 and 2 respectively against the judgment dated 27/6/2015 of the Additional District and Sessions Court (For the trial of cases relating to Atrocities and and Sexual Violence against Women and Children). The first accused had been convicted for offence u/s 376(2)(i)(n) of I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 10,000.00 with default sentence of rigorous imprisonment for two months, imprisonment for six months u/s 23 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. The second accused is convicted to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000.00 u/s 109 r/w 376 (2)(i), (n) of I.P.C. with default sentence of two months. She is also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 6 months u/s 23 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000.

(2.) The victim in the case is the daughter of the 2nd accused. While they were residing in a rented building at Chambakkara Poonithura village, the first accused, who was a co- worker of the 2nd accused joined them and started residing together. Prosecution allege that, during the period from 4/8/2013 to 15/8/2013, the first accused committed rape on the victim on several occasions at their residence itself. The 2nd accused, mother of the victim aided and instigated the first accused to have sexual intercourse with the victim.

(3.) The crime came to light when the wife of the first accused had come to the residence of the 2nd accused and created a hue and cry. All of them were summoned to the police station and while the victim was questioned by the Child Welfare Committee, the incident of rape came to light. Based on the same, investigation was conducted. Necessary medical report was obtained and the first accused was charge-sheeted for having committed rape and the second accused for abetting the rape. They were also charged u/s 5(I)(n) r/w 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. Since the accused pleaded that they were not guilty of the charges levelled against them, prosecution entered into trial and examined PW1 to PW15. Exts.P1 to P15 were the documents relied upon and MO1 to MO9 were the material objects that were identified. After completing the procedural formalities, the accused were convicted as stated above.