KANNAN Vs. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal is directed against the Judgment dated 10.10.2001 made in S.C.No.44 of 1999 by the Court of IV Additional Sessions Judge (PCR), Madurai, thereby convicting appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 376 r/w.511 IPC and sentencing both of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years each and also to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/= and in default, to undergo a further term of rigorous imprisonment for six months.

(2.) The charge against appellant/accused Nos.1 and 2 by the lower court is that both of them joining hands with each other, with an intent to commit the offence of rape on the victim girl, since she belongs to the scheduled caste, on 21.12.1998, at about 7.00 a.m., when the victim was going to the Manjoor Government High School, the first accused, plucking her school bag and throwing the same away and lifting her physically and the second accused, shutting her mouth when she raised alarm and taking her to the land of the first accused and making her lie on the grass, they not only untied the buttons of her blouse, but also lifted her petticoat, thus attempting to rape her and hence, both the accused became liable to be tried for the commission of the offence punishable under Section 376 r/w.511 IPC r/w. Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and hence the charge.

(3.) The trial court, having framed the said charge, based on the facts and circumstances revealed from the case of the prosecution and permitting the parties to record their evidence, has conducted a full trial of the case with due opportunity for both to be heard. During trial, on the part of the prosecution, whose duty it is to prove the case put up to the requirement of law beyond all reasonable doubts, eleven witnesses have been examined for oral evidence as P.Ws.1 to 11; 15 documents have been marked as Exs.P.1 to P.15 for documentary evidence and five material objects have also been marked as M.Os.1 to 5. On the contrary, the witnesses examined, the documents and the material objects marked on the part of the defence were nil.