SUNIL HARISCHANDRA BHOIR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the appellant 's conviction by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Raigad at Alibag for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 354, 452, 323 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, "IPC ") and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for seven years with fine of Rs.5,000.00, simple imprisonment for six months with fine of Rs.500.00, rigorous imprisonment for one year with fine of Rs.1,000.00, simple imprisonment for three months and six months with fine of Rs.300.00 and Rs.500.00 respectively imposed upon the appellant on the said charges.

(2.) THE facts which are material for deciding this appeal are as under: The victim is a widow who was staying with her sons Mohan and Jaywant, both serving in private sector. The appellant was a friend of the victim 's sons. At the time of the incident on 12-9-2010 the victim was 51-years old and the appellant was 20-years old. The victim and her two sons had gone to the house of her sister-in-law for dinner. The victim came back to her house while her sons stayed at the house of her sister-in-law. The victim had closed the door and chained it. She heard knock on the door and believing that her sons had returned, she opened the door. The appellant is then alleged to have entered the house and committed rape upon her at three places in the house. She states that she changed her clothes and went to the house of her brother-in-law after the accused had run away. Thereafter, she narrated the incident to her sons and relations and then a report was made to the police, whereupon investigation started.

(3.) THE learned Additional Sessions Judge, to whom the case was made over, charged the appellant for offences punishable under Sections 376, 354, 452, 323 and 506 of the IPC. Since he pleaded not guilty, he was put on trial at which the prosecution examined in all twelve witnesses in its attempt to bring home the guilt of the appellant. After considering the prosecution evidence in the light of defence of denial, the learned Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as afore-mentioned. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant is before this Court.