STATE Vs. SUBRAMANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C. A. No. 650 of 1983 is an appeal by the State represented by the learned Public Prosecutor under Section 377 Cr. P. C. , for enhancing the sentence, imposed for the offence under Section 376 I. P. C. on the respondents, who were accused 1 to 3 in S. C. No. 44 of 1981 on the file of the Fifth Additional Sessions Judge, Madras. C. A. No. 651 of 1983 is a similar appeal by the State, preferred under Section 378 Cr. P. C. against the acquittal of the same respondents, challenging the correctness of the acquittal of respondents 1 and 2 for an offence under Section 366 I. P. C. and the acquittal of the third respondent for an offence under Section 366 read with section 34 I. P. C. Cr1. RC. No. 470 of 1982 has been preferred by A-3, whose conviction imposed for the offence under Section 376 I. P. C. , by the trial judge, was confirmed in C. A. No. 217 of 1982, on the me of the Sixth additional Sessions Judge, Madras, while the sentence of imprisonment was reduced from three years Rigorous Imprisonment to two years rigorous imprisonment Cr1. RC. No. 561 of 1982 has been preferred by A.-i, whose conviction for the offence of rape was confirmed by the Sixth Additional sessions Judge in C. A. No. 250 of 1982, while reducing the sentence of imprisonment awarded by the Trial Court from three years to two years Rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) THE second respondent in C. A. Nos. 650 and 651 of 1983, who was convicted for an offence under Section 376 I. P. C. , by the trial Court, was acquitted by the Sixth additional Sessions Judge in C. A. No. 221 of 1982. The appeals and revisions arise out of the same Sessions case and hence are being disposed of by a common judgment.

(3.) P. W. 6 examined A.-1 to A.-3 on 2-12-1980, between 3. 30 and 4. 30 p. m. The Medical Officer issued, Ex. P.-5, the certification in respect of A.-I showing that there was no injury due to nail or biting on the neck and face of A.-1 or on his private parts. Except the absence of smagma, there was no evidence of recent sexual intercourse. A similar certificate issued for A.-3 in Ex. P.-4. A.-2 also did not exhibit any evidence of recent sexual intercourse, but the Doctor noticed a healing primary chance, on the penis. Ex. P.-3 is the certificate issued for A.-2. The medical opinion was that the individuals were potent, and capable of committing sexual intercourse.