MADHUKAR NARAYAN KOTAMBE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal is to judgment rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, in Sessions Case No. 17 of 2006 whereby the appellant has been convicted for offences punishable under Section 376 and 506 of the I. P. C. and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven (7) years and to pay fine of Rs. 3000/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six (6) months on first count and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one (1) year and to pay fine of Rs. 250/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one (1) month on the second count with direction that both the substantive sentences shall run concurrently.

(2.) Background facts leading to the prosecution in short, are as follows :

(3.) The prosecutrix did not immediately disclose the incident to her husband after his return on the next day. Her brother was called. She subsequently narrated the incident to her husband and brother. Her husband told her that they would be defamed in the village if the incident would be reported to the police. However, after three (3) days, they went to the police station and lodged FIR (Exh. 29). The police referred her for clinical examination. A spot panchnama was drawn at the small farmhouse in the same noon. Her petticoat was also recovered. The appellant was arrested and was sent to undergo clinical examination. On the basis of the material gathered during course of investigation, he was charge-sheeted for offences punishable under Sections 376 and 506 of the I. P. C.