RAMESH Vs. STATE BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Accused Nos.1 and 2 in S.C.No.98 of 2006, which was tried and disposed of by the learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethimandram (Mahila Court), Coimbatore, are the appellants herein. The first appellant faced the charges of committing offences punishable under Sections 450, 376 and 506(ii) IPC, whereas the second appellant faced the trial for offences punishable under Sections 450, 376 r/w. 109 IPC and Section 506(ii) IPC. At the conclusion of trial, the trial judge held them guilty of the offences as per the charges, convicted them and imposed the following sentences: i) ten years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/-, with a default sentence of one year simple imprisonment on each one of them for the offence under Section 450 IPC; ii) rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and a fine of Rs. 1000/- with a default sentence of simple imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 376 IPC on A1; iii) rigorous imprisonment for 10 years for the offence under Section 376 IPC and Section 376 r/w.109 IPC and iv) rigorous imprisonment for 3 years without fine, on both the appellants for the offence under Section 506(ii) IPC. The order of sentence also recites that the substantive sentences of imprisonment shall run concurrently, besides the period of sentence already undergone being set off in terms of Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) Challenging the conviction as well as the sentence, the appellants have come forward with the present appeal on various grounds set out in the appeal petition.

(3.) The prosecution theory, in brief, is as follows: