BALAJI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -CHALLENGE in this appeal is to judgment rendered by learned ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, osmanabad, in Sessions Case No. 4/2007. By the impugned judgment, both appellants have been convicted for offence punishable under Section 376 (2) (g) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ,10 (ten) years each and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000 (Rs. Five thousand)each, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years.

(2.) BACKGROUND facts of the prosecution case may be briefly stated as follows: the prosecutrix (PW3) was aged around eighteen years and is member of 'wadar' community. Both the appellants are young lads belonging to same community. In the noon of August 27th, 2006, the prosecutrix was returning from 'gairan' (Pastureland) after answering call of nature. While she was passing from near a dilapidated house of one Gujare, appellant No. 1 balaji called her towards that house. She saw that appellant No. 2-Suresh was also near that dilapidated house. They pulled her towards the dilapidated house by holding both her hands and hair. They fell her to the ground after reaching the dilapidated house. Appellant No. 1-Balaji held her hands whereas, appellant No. 2-Suresh lifted her saree and forcibly took out the nicker. He thereafter ravished her. She raised hue and cry while appellant No. 2-Suresh committed forcible intercourse with her. Her aunt's son, by name Somnath and cousin, by name bhima Pawar came to her rescue. They beaten up both the appellants. The appellants fled away from the place. Thereafter, Bhima Pawar reached her to the parents house. She narrated the incident to her parents in the evening after they returned home. A meeting of relatives was called at her parents' house. It was decided thereafter to lodge report with the Police. On next day (28. 6. 2006), she narrated the incident to the Police. The P. S. O. , at Rural Police Station, Osmanabad reduced her complaint into writing and registered offence vide Crime No. 120/2006, under Section 376 (2) (g) of the Indian penal Code. The prosecutrix was referred to Civil Hospital for clinical examination. Her undergarments and other clothes were seized. The lady medical Officer, who examined the prosecutrix, collected vaginal swab and sample of the pubic hair etc. The police arrested the appellants. Consequent upon material gathered during course of investigation, both the appellants were charge-sheeted for offence of gang rape.

(3.) A charge (Exh. 6) was framed against them. They pleaded 'not guilty' to the charge. Their defence was of simple denial. It was suggested, however, that there was love affair between the prosecutrix and appellant No. 2-Suresh. It was suggested that appellant No. 1-Balaji was the intermeddler, who used to help these lovers in exchanging their letters and arranging for their meetings. It is also suggested that in the relevant noon, the prosecutrix went to the dilapidated house of Gujare, on her own accord and as per the signals exchanged between her and the appellant No. 2-Suresh, so as to meet him clandestinely. According to the defence, appellant no. 2-Suresh and the prosecutrix were to marry but the proposal was not approved by their parents and when her relatives saw them together at the dilapidated house of Gujare, a false report of alleged rape was given to the Police. Hence, both the appellants urged for acquittal from the charge.