STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. SUBHASH SITARAM SANGARE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal appeal has been filed by the State of Maharashtra being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 31st December, 1985 passed by Sessions Judge, Ratnagiri, in Sessions Case No. 64 of 1985, acquitting the respondent/accused Subhash Sitaram Sangare, who had been charged for offences punishable under sections 376, 354, and 417 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) THE prosecution case in nutshell can be narrated as follows: a private complaint dated 24th August, 1984 came to be lodged in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ratnagiri by the complainant Mangala Balu Mavalankar (P. W. 3) against the respondent Subhash Sitaram Sangare, for offences punishable under sections 354, 376, and 417 of the Indian Penal Code. It was alleged in the said complaint by her that she was resident of Fagarvathar, Ratnagiri and was staying in her own house along with her parents. She was working as a maid servant with one Advocate Patane, and that, she used to leave her house early in the morning at 7. 30 a. m. , and used to return home at about 6. 30 p. m. It was further stated by her in the said complaint that in the year 1983, few days after Diwali, while she was returning home, after finishing her work as maid servant with Advocate Patane, the accused allegedly came from her behind, embraced her, pressed her mouth, so as to prevent her from shouting, dragged her near the bushes, removed her underwear, so also, his own underwear and had sexual intercourse with her. It was further stated by the complainant in the said complaint that the said act of forcible intercourse was done by the accused against her will and without her consent. It was also mentioned by her that she was threatened by the accused from disclosing the said fact to anyone and that, accordingly, she did not disclose it to anyone, even after returning home. It is also further the case of the complainant, as narrated in the said complaint that three-four days after the incident in question, the accused again accosted her at the same place, and again committed forcible intercourse with her. He also promised to marry her. Thus, as per the narration of the complainant Mangala, the accused continued to have sexual intercourse with her on five to six occasions. Thereafter, she conceived. After completion of about seven months, she fell ill, and was taken to one Dr. Shinde for examination, who told her mother Indira (P. W. 5) that Mangala was seven months pregnant. Thereafter Indira made queries with Mangala, after coming home, as to who had sexual intercourse with her and it was then that the complainant disclosed the name of the accused. As per the narration of the complainant, the mother of the complainant then went to the place of the parents of the accused, and told them that their son should get married with Mangala as she was seven months pregnant from him. All of them flatly refused the suggestion, including the accused. Thereafter, a private complaint came to be lodged by Mangala.

(3.) THEREAFTER, charge was framed against the accused in the Court of Sessions, Ratnagiri, after the case was committed to the Court of Sessions, under sections 376, 354 and 417 of the Indian Penal Code. The accused who was explained the contents of the charge in Marathi, denied the same and pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The defence of the accused was that of total denial. It was also suggested by way of defence that he was a well-to-do person, coming from a rich family and that, the complainant Mangala and her parents were interested in getting her marriage done with him, and therefore, he had been falsely implicated in this case.