(1.) THE present appellant-original accused no.2 has preferred this appeal under sec. 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 29.10.2004 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court no. 7, Morbi in Sessions Case No. 3/2003, whereby, the learned trial Judge has convicted the accused under sec. 376 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R/I for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default, to undergo further S/I for three months. The accused is further convicted for the offence punishable under sec. 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R/I for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default, to undergo S/I for three months. The accused is also convicted for the offence under sec. 135 of the Bombay Police Act and sentenced to undergo R/I for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default, to undergo further S/I for one month, which is impugned in this appeal.
(2.) THE brief facts of the prosecution case is that, on 8.4.2002, when the appellant was all alone with his Niece in the tent during night hours, he had taken advantage of loneliness and committed rape on the victim because, at that time, his wife had gone to their native place to bring children back. That as he was scared that his niece will inform about the incident to her family members, he had inflicted blows on her head, and in retaliation, when victim had thrown stone at accused, he got angered and again inflicted blows on the head and other parts of her body, and that is how, she was done to death. The appellant has also tried to bring out a case that there was a robbery which was not proved. Therefore, complaint came to be filed.
(3.) THE learned advocate Mr. Barot for the present appellant has contended that the trial court has committed an error in passing the impugned judgment and order, inasmuch as it failed to appreciate the material on record in its proper perspective, and hence, the present appellant be given the benefit of doubt and be acquitted.