SONU BABU PIVAL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal, the appellants have challenged their conviction under Section 323 of Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.) and sentence recorded by learned Sessions Judge, Pune on 14.8.1996 in Sessions Case No. 379 of 1995 whereby learned Sessions Judge was pleased to acquit the appellants for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 342, and 506 of I.P.C. but the appellant No. 1 Sonu was convicted for offence punishable under Section 323 of I.P.C. and sentenced to suffer R.I.for six months and to pay fine in the sum of Rs.300/, in default to suffer R.I. for one month, while appellant No. 1 (Kanta Sonu Pival) was found guilty for offence punishable under Section 323 of I.P.C. but instead of sentencing her to any punishment, she was directed to be released on her entering into a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,000/without surety and to appear and receive sentence when called upon during the period of one year from the date of execution of personal bond.

(2.) The appellant Sonu and Kanta are husband and wife respectively who resided at 28/16 at Renge Hills, Pune20. According to the prosecution, the appellant no.1 Sonu was unemployed, while his wife Kanta was working in Ammunition Factory at Khadki, Pune. They were residing with their three children. It appears from the case of the prosecution that Sangita, prosecutrix, who was inhabitant of Bhivani in Haryana State, was staying with appellant, as appellant No. 2 Kanta is her paternal aunt. From January, 1995, after Sangita lost her grandmother, Appellants had brought Sangita with them at Pune.

(3.) Appellant No. 1 Sonu used to stay at home, since he was unemployed. Sonu used to take indecent liberty with Sangita and had committed rape upon her from time to time during the period of about two months and also assaulted her. It is the case of the prosecution that Sangita had missed her monthly menstrual period. Thereafter, Accused No. 2 Kanta, paternal aunt of the prosecutrix became suspicious about Sangita and enquired with her. At that time Kanta herself was carrying, therefore, Sangita did not dare to tell anything to her about what Sonu had done with her. On one occasion, the prosecutrix was taken to Mrs Dr Patil, who found prosecutrix carrying with two months pregnancy. Knowing this, Accused No. 2 Kanta got annoyed with prosecutrix and beat her after enquiry with the prosecutrix as to how she became pregnant. Thus, the prosecutrix made disclosure to Kanta that she became pregnant from Sonu (appellant No. 1). Thereafter, prosecutrix was not allowed to leave house and used to be assaulted. Dr. Patil had prescribed certain capsules to Sangita which she had consumed. As a result of which the prosecutrix had miscarriage of about 15 days prior to 6.7.1995. Finally neighbourers came to know about the illtreatment meted out to the prosecutrix. She had approached neighboring woman by name Savitribai and requested her to give some food. Savitribai noted marks of violence on the person of the prosecutrix. Rajendra, the elder son of Savitribai then approached a Social Worker, by name Dinesh Metalu, who is a member of Cantonment Board. On 6.7.1995 Dinesh Metallu visited the house of Savitribai. At that time, the prosecutrix was in the house of Savitribai. Dinesh Metalu made enquiry with the prosecutrix and took her to Range Hills Police Chowky. P.S.I. Jambhle attached with Khadki Police Station recorded the complaint of prosecutrix (Exh.19) giving rise to C.R.No. 127 of 1995.