AHMAD SHAIKH HUSSAIN IBRAHIM Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant is an accused in the Sessions Case No. 40 of 1989. He has been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Margao, for an offence of rape punishable under Section 376 of IPC and sentenced to undergo 7 years of Rigorous Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/ or in default to undergo 1 year of Rigorous Imprisonment.

(2.) IT appears that on 9-9-1989 the complainant Miss Shoona Burd who is a British National and had come to Goa as a tourist along with a friend by name Susan Wallwork, was staying in Room No. 33 of 'colmar' Hotel at Colva. The appellant Ahmad Shaikh Hussain Ibrahim who is a Somali National was also putting up in Colva in another Hotel by name 'vincy' Hotel. It is said that on the night of 9th to 10/09/1989, when the complainant after dinner went to her room at Colmar Hotel, the appellant who was standing behind her when the door of the room was opened suddenly pushed her inside the room and wielding a knife threatened to kill her in case she raised any alarm. Thereupon the door of the room was locked from inside and the appellant under threats with a knife ordered the complainant to undress and made her to lay down on one of the cots of the room. Thereupon the said appellant forcibly maintained sexual intercourse with the complainant by saying that in case she shouts she would be killed. After maintaining sexual intercourse the appellant proposed to the complainant that they should go both to the room of his Hotel to which the complainant agreed since this should give her an opportunity to run away and to get rid from the appellant's clutches. Thereupon when they both left the room and climbed down staircase the appellant stumbled near the gate down and at that time the complainant ran away from him and shouted for help rushing towards the room of one British National who was at that time talking to her room mate Susan Wallwork. On the basis of these facts charge was framed against the appellant under Section 376 of IPC to which he pleaded not guilty.

(3.) THE case of the appellant is of a simple denial and it has been alleged by him that the complainant was not even present in Goa on the day of the purported incident. However, the learned Sessions Judge after recording the evidence found the appellant guilty and sentenced him accordingly.