BABURAO RAMDAS PADGIL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused/appellant in this Criminal Appeal questions the conviction and sentence awarded to him by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Nagpur on 31-3-1989 for the offences punishable under Section 376 (2) (a) (iii) of I. P. C. and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 3000/- or in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment of one year. The accused/appellant Baburao S/c Ramdas Padgil alongwith one Triveni S/o Vijay Shankar Shukla were charged by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Nagpur on 16-2-1989 to the effect that the accused persons being Police Officers of Police Station Ballarsha in furtherance of their common intention on or about, between the night of 19-2-86 and 20-2-86 at Laxmi Lodge Cotton Market, Nagpur in room No. 1 committed rape on Kumari Suman D/o Punjaram Girde, aged about 16 years a female minor in their custody against her will and without her consent and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 376 (2) (iii) and Section 376 (2) (g ).

(2.) IN short, the prosecution story during the trial was that Prosecutrix Ku. Suman (P. W. 3) was having love affairs with one Shaikh Babu. On 17-2-1986, P. W. 3 Ku. Sumar and Shaikh Babu left the place of their residence viz. Jani and first came to Nagpur and from there went to Yavatmal and next Morlling on 8-2-1986 both of them went to Dhamangaon and from Dhamangaon to Wardha and from Waroha back to Dhamangaon and from Dhamangaon booked tickets for Kajipeth on their way to Kajipeth, when the train haulted at Ballarsha, two Police Constables entered the Companrnent and askea. them about the tickets and both Suman (P. W. 3) and Shaikh Babu were taken to Ballarsha Police Station. During that night they stayed at Police Station and next day two Constables were deputed for reaching P. W. 3, Suman and Shaikh Babu to Hinganghat Police Station. These two Police Constables were the present accused/appellant Baburao Ramdas Padgil and another accused Triveni. Both the accused persons brought P. W. 3 Suman and Shaikh Babu to Nagpur in the night of 19-2-1986 and all of them stayed at Laxmi Loge, Cotton Market, Nagpur. During the night, the accused No; 1 Baburao Ramdas Padgil committed rape on P. W. 3 Suman and thereafter another accused Triveni committed rape on P. W. 3 Suman. In the morning of 20-2-1986, the Prosecutrix P. W. 3 Suman as well as Shaikh Babu were brought to Hinganghat and from Hinganghat to Jam and since no Police Officer was present at Police Chowki Jam, they were again brought to Hinganghat. Since P. W. 3 Suman left her house on 17-2-1986 without intimating her parents and she did not return the home even in the night, her father (P. W. 1) Punjaram lodged First Information Report against Shaikh Babu and the said offence was registered at Police Station Hinganghat vide Crime No. 45 of 1986 under Sections 363 and 366 IPC. Since this offence was already registered on 20-2-1986 on her reaching Hinganghat; she was sent for medical examination at Narahr. P. W. 3 Suman was called for interrogation by the police at Hinganghaton 22. 2. 1986 and during interrogation, she disclosed the facts about rape committed on her by the accused/appellant Baburao Ramdas padgil and another accused Triveni and on the basis of that report. First Information report was registered on 22-2-1986 at Police Station Hinganghat under Sections 376 and 34 I. P. C. After the registration of the First Information Report, the investigation commenced and the Investigating Officer prepared Spot Panchanama (Ex. 13) and seized clothes of accused Baburao vide Ex. 16, seized Register of the Lodge vide Ex. 14, Uniform of another accused Triveni by Ex. 15. The Prosecutrix PW-3 Suman was medically examined on 25-2-86 and so also the accused appellant Baburao as well as another accused Triveni were also medically examined on 25-2-1986. After conclusion of investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted charge-sheet and the case was tried by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Nagpur and the accused/ appellants were charged for the offence punishable under Section 376 (2) (iii) and Section 376 (2) (g) on 16-2-1989 along with another accused Triveni Vijay Shankar Shukla. The accused/appellant as well as another accused pleaded not guilty. The Prosecution in support of his case examined punjaram (P. W. 1) (Father of Prosecutrix Suman P. W. 3), Premsingh S70 Puransingh Thakur, P. W. 2, Suman, P. W. 3, Laxmibai W/o Punjaramji Girde (Mother of Prosecutrix) P. W. 4, Madhu S/o Kawadu Sahare. P. W. 5, Dr. Keshao S/o Maroti More, P. W. 6, Dr. Vivek Sb Dinkar Despande, P. W. 7, Raithan Sb , Mahadeorao Bhawane, P. W. 8, Manikrao S/o Baburao Chate, P. W-9, and Zamir Ahemad S/o Abdul Sattar, P. W. 10. The documents referred 10 herein above were exhibited alongwith the documents.

(3.) THE statements of the accused/appellant Baburao as well as another accused Triveni were recorded under Section 313 Cr. P. C. The accused; appellant Baburao also submitted written reply before the trial Court purported to be under Section 313 Cr. P. C. on 28-3-1989 and he denied having committed any offence. In written reply submitted by the accused/appellant under Section 313 Cr. P. C. , he furnished explanation for bringing the prosecutrix P. W. 3 Suman to Nagpur by stating that the girl told him that her parents might be at the residence of her maternal uncle at Nagpur and on that basis Suman was brought to Nagpur by him.