SYD. ALI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge is to the judgment and order dated 28-7-2016 rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Akola in Sessions Trial 144/2013, by and under which accused Sayyad Ali Sayyad Noor is convicted for offence punishable under Section 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code (" IPC " for short) and is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to payment of fine of Rs.25,000/- and is further convicted for offence punishable under Section 417 of the IPC and is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and to payment of fine of Rs.10,000/- and accused Shahidkhan and Ibbu @ Sayyad Ibrahim are convicted for offence punishable under Section 109 read with Section 376 of the IPC and are sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to payment of fine of Rs.5,000/- each. Criminal Appeal 324/2016 is preferred by accused Sayyad Ali and Ibbu @ Sayyad Ibrahim and Criminal Appeal 310/2016 is preferred by accused Shahidkhan. Both the appeals are taken up for final hearing and decided by this common judgment.

(2.) Heard Shri A.K. Bhangde, learned Counsel for the appellants in Criminal Appeal 324/2016, Shri R.M. Daga, learned Counsel for the appellant in Criminal Appeal 310/2016 and Shri A.V. Palshikar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent- State.

(3.) The gist of the prosecution case is thus : Accused Shahidkhan was residing near the residence of the sister of the prosecutrix. Accused Sayyad Ali and accused Ibbu used to visit the house of accused Shahidkhan. The prosecutrix was acquainted with one Priya who was also residing near the house of the sister of the prosecutrix. Priya conveyed to the prosecutrix that accused Sayyad Ali has expressed love for the prosecutrix and is desirous of talking with the prosecutrix. She handed over a mobile phone to the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix and accused Sayyad Ali used to converse telephonically. The prosecutrix and accused Sayyad Ali then started meeting. Sayyad Ali started to visit the house of the prosecutrix at Morkewadi, Akola. Sayyad Ali took the prosecutrix to Naygaon to the house of accused Ibbu @ Sayyad Ibrahim. Accused Shahidkhan and Ibbu locked the door of the house from outside and went away, leaving the prosecutrix and Sayyad Ali alone in the room. Sayyad Ali sought sexual favour from the prosecutrix, who refused to oblige. Sayyad Ali, however, induced the prosecutrix to have sex promising that he will marry her and will convince his parents to consent. Thereafter, Sayyad Ali established sexual contact with the prosecutrix on several occasions. He did not marry the prosecutrix, who lodged report at Police Station Akola File, Akola. On the basis of the said report (Exhibit 38), offence punishable under Sections 417 , 420 , 376 , 109 of the and Section 3(1) (xii) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities), Act, 1989 ("Atrocities Act" for short) was registered. Investigation was handed over to SDPO Amarsing Jadhav. The caste certificate of the prosecutrix was collected, she was referred for medical examination, accused Sayyad Ali was medically examined, statements of witnesses were recorded and on completion of the investigation charge-sheet was submitted in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class (Court 2), Akola, who committed the proceedings to the Sessions Court. The learned Sessions Judge framed charge (Exhibit 31) under Sections 376 , 109 and 417 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(xii) of the Atrocities Act. The accused abjured guilt and claimed to be tried. The defence is of total denial. Accused Sayyad Ali stated in the statement under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code that he and the prosecutrix were in love. He, however, denied having promised the prosecutrix marriage. He further denied having established sexual contact with the prosecutrix.