SATINATH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is challenging the judgment and order dated 14th February, 2007 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhandara in Sessions Trial No. 45/2006 whereby the appellant/accused was convicted for offence punishable under sections 376,448, 506 of the Indian Penal Code (in short "IPC"). For offence punishable under section 376, IPC, the appellant/ accused was sentenced to suffer R. I. for seven years and fine in the sum of Rs. 1,000/- in default, to undergo further RI for one year ; for offence punishable u/s.448, RI for one year and fine of Rs.100/- in default to undergo RI for one month; whereas for offence u/s.506, IPC, he was sentenced to suffer R.I. for one year and to pay a fine in the sum of Rs.100/-in default, to further undergo R.I. for one month, with a direction that substantive sentences to run concurrently; with further direction that out of the amount of fine, a sum of Rs. 1,000/- shall be payable as compensation to the prosecutrix.

(2.) Facts of the case filtering out unnecessary details, are these:

(3.) The trial Court had framed charge against the appellant on 2nd December, 2006 to which the appellant pleaded "not guilty" and claimed to be tried. The prosecutrix deposed as PW-1 about the incident of forcible rape committed by the appellant at the point of knife, threatening her with dire consequences, if she raises shout, with further threatening not to disclose the incident to anybody; lest he would kill her then and there. The incident was reported to the police vide Exh. 11. Vandana (PW-2) who initially was shying off to disclose the fact, had to be cross-examined by learned APP and she admitted that the prosecutrix had narrated the incident about forcible sexual intercourse by the appellant. The prosecution also relied upon the evidence of Dr. Shahank Kshirsagar (PW 4) who deposed about medical examination of the appellant (accused) to certify that the accused was capable of performing sexual intercourse. The appellant was examined pursuant to requisition letter Exh. 17. PW-7, Dr. Ashish Bannerji examined by the prosecution also indicated that he had examined the prosecutrix and issued certificate Exh.32 regarding the medical examination. The Investigating Officer also deposed about the investigation done in this case.