LAHU SHIVAJI PAWAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the applicants are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.198/2021 dtd. 27/5/2021 registered with Udgir Rural Police Station, Dist. Latur, for the offence punishable under Sec. 354, 354- B, 326-A, 324, 323, 509, 143, 147, 148, 149, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

(2.) Heard learned Advocate Mr. A.S. Barlota and Mr. S.S. Panale for the respective applicants and learned APP Mr. N.T. Bhagat for the respondent.

(3.) The learned Advocates appearing for the applicants vehemently submitted that the First Information Report is nothing but result of the revenge. The informant intends to take and also resting on a concocted story. The informant might be sustained certain injuries but she has tried to encash the situation. Informant-prosecutrix is aged 35 and she states that since last 09 years she is residing with her second husband. She has the knowledge that the husband is already married. She also states that the first wife of the husband used to come along with her children as the husband used to stay with the informant always and used to give threat to the informant that she should leave the husband. She states that incident took place around 6.00 p.m. on 17/5/2021 when the first wife of her husband with sons and her relatives had gone to the house where the informant and the husband were. It was told to them that they should come as they want to settle the dispute. They were taken in auto at their Tanda near P.K. Bar. There she was assaulted severely. Though her husband was telling them that she should not be assaulted; yet, all the relatives had assaulted her severely. Chilly powder was applied on her face and neck. Thereafter it is stated that again after assaulting her, four male members had outraged her modesty by placing their hands on her parts and the ladies had applied marking nut oil almost on her entire body till her private part. She had become unconscious and then she was taken by her husband to Udgir Rural Police Station. In her First Information Report itself she has stated that when earlier the police had come to take her statement in annoyance she had told that rape has been committed on her. However, she changed that in First Information Report by stating that there was no rape committed on her, but it was outraging of her modesty. Therefore, taking into consideration those allegations offence was registered under Sec. 354, 354-B, 326-A of the Indian Penal Code and other Ss. . No offence is registered under Sec. 376-D of the Indian Penal Code. However, it appears that later on she has changed her version and re-submitted that she was severely assaulted. When according to her own version there were 4-5 lady members, how she could have been ravished, is a question. Now, the investigation is over and charge sheet is filed. Though the applicants have been shown as not traceable, they have not left the village. If we consider the documentary evidence along with the charge sheet, then, it can be seen that the statement of the husband would show that only the informant was assaulted. The landlord, where the informant and her husband used to stay, is also stating that some dispute had taken place due to the domestic reason. The statements of neighbouring witnesses show that only dispute had taken place, that too, assault and they are not supporting the supplementary statement given by the informant that rape was committed on the informant. The husband, who was allegedly present, is also not supporting the informant. The incident is alleged to have taken place on 17/5/2021, the First Information Report came to be lodged on 27/5/2021 and the supplementary statement has been recorded on 11/6/2021. It shows the concoction. The medical papers also show that the informant had not made complaint about rape, that is, such history was not given. Though medical papers say that she has sustained 7% burn due to marking nut oil; yet, it is to be noted that not even the husband has reported the incident to police immediately. Further, the hospital had treated it as medico legal case, but there is specific remark on the case paper dtd. 4/5/2021 that arrangement should be made for recording of statement of the patient, which was previously done, but police did not record the statement. Therefore, taking into consideration all these documentary evidence it raises doubt about the prosecution story and, therefore, the interim protection granted earlier to the applicants deserve to be confirmed.