PRATIK MANIKRAO FULZELE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellants Pratik and Sudesh in Criminal appeal No. 70/1998, Prithviraj in Criminal Appeal No. 212/1998 and Munna and chhotu in Criminal Appeal No. 30. 5/1998 have filed these appeals in order to take exception to their convictions for the offences punishable under sections 376 (2) (g) , 366 read with 34, 456 read with 34, 506-II read with 34 and 354 read with 34 of the Penal Code and sentences of various terms of imprisonment from one month to nine years and fine of Rs. Fifty to Rs. Five Hundred, imposed upon each of them, for these offences, by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Nagpur by his judgment in Sessions Trial No. 289 of 1996.

(2.) The facts, which led to prosecution and conviction of the appellants along with one Rajesh Baliram Mandhe, original accused No. 4, are as under : on the night of 4th February, 1996 when prosecutrix Shakuntala was sleeping in her house along with her husband Tekchand and daughter Geeta, accused persons climbed over the roof of house, entered her house and dragged the prosecutrix to a nearby stream and committed rape upon the prosecutrix one after other. The prosecutrix took a chance of escaping when one Ramteke came to the spot. The prosecutrix and her husband approached Police Station, Kamptee where an oral report was given. An offence was registered and in course of investigation police caused prosecutrix to be examined and seized her clothing. The police also arrested accused, caused them to be medically examined, seized their clothes, caused samples of their body fluids taken, caused samples to be sent to Forensic Science Laboratory, performed necessary panchanamas, recorded statements of witnesses and on completion of investigation sent charge-sheet.

(3.) Upon commitment of the case to the Court of Sessions, learned 9th additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur charged four appellants, along with original accused No. 4 Rajesh, for the offences punishable under sections 456 read with 34, 354 read with 34, 506 read with 34 and 376 (2) (g) of the Indian Penal Code. Since all the accused-appellants pleaded not guilty the accused were put on trial, in course of which the prosecution examined as many as eleven witness. Upon consideration of their evidence, the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, to whom the trial was eventually assigned, came to convict and sentence the appellants, as mentioned above. Aggrieved thereby, the appellants have preferred this appeal.