HANUMANTHU RAMA RAO Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These criminal appeals are filed against common judgment dated 29-12-1995 in SC No.83 of 1995 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge, Srikakulam. The appellant in Crl. A No.80 of 1996 is accused No. 1 and the appellant in Crl. A No.92 of 1996 is accused No.2 in SC No.83 of 1995, Accused No.l is found guilty of the offences under Sections 363, 376(2)(a), 419 and 506(2) of IPC. Accused No.2 is found guilty of the offences under Sections 363;376, 506 (2) of IPC. A1 and A2 are sentenced for the offence under Section 363 to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 3 years each and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for six months. For the offence committed under Section 376(2)(a), A1 is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.8,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 years and for the offence under Section 419, simple imprisonment for one year. Both the accused were sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 506(2). A2 is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 8 years and to pay a fine of Rs.8,000/-, in default, simple imprisonment for 2 years for the offence under Section 376. Being aggrieved by the conviction and the sentences, A1 and A2 filed these two appeals.

(2.) Brief facts of the case is that A1 is the gunman and A2 is the driver of the car of Smt. K. Pratibha Bharathi, the then Hon'ble Minister. Though the son of Smt. K. Pratibha Bharathi owned the car, she was using it. On 12-1-1995 at about 11.00 p.m., Al and A2 came in the said car to Duppalavalasa Colony, Srikakulam while the prosecutrix - Killi Parvathi (PW2) and her mother-Killi Shanthamma (PW1) after answering the calls of the nature they were standing in front of their house, Al impersonating himself as Sub-Inspector of Police of II Town Police Station, Srikakulam had kidnapped a female minor girl aged about 14 years (PW2) from the lawful guardianship of her mother (PW1) and committed criminal intimidation threatening the mother of the minor girl by both the accused (A1 and A2) stating that they would shoot her and she would have to face dire consequences if she reveals their beastly acts to any one. After kidnapping the minor girl, the accused took her in the car without the consent of PWs.l and 2 and they have asked PW2 to give her consent for sexual intercourse, but she refused to do so. When she refused to give her consent for sexual intercourse, the accused stopped the car near S.M. Puram road and she was taken out of the car and her hands were caught hold by keeping her back side and she was taken beyond the bushes and she was forcibly raped at about 11-30 p.m./12-00 midnight by A1 and again she was taken in the car to some other place near Polytechnic College and there also she was again raped by A1 and thereafter by A2 and again by Al and then she was dropped at a distance of her house and went away.

(3.) PW1 is the mother of the victim girl. She stated that she is working as agricultural cooli. She is having three children i.e., one daughter and two sons. One son (Kitti Ramana) is working in a brandy shop and the other son (Kitti Jagari) and her daughter is Kitti Parvathi (PW2). Her daughter was studying in the 7th class in the High School. She stated that on the fateful day her son (Kitti Ranumd) returned home from brandy shop at about 10-30 p.m. and after serving meals to him, she and her daughter together went to road side to answer the calls of the nature and when a car was coming from the back side, they stood up and the car proceeded towards Thotapalem side after crossing them and after going to certain distance it took turn and came to them at that time they were going towards their house, a person was armed with a gun came and caught hold of her daughter and took her daughter forcibly into the car when she questioned, the said person stated that he is the Sub-Inspector of Police, II Town P.S. and he came to arrest her. When she said that he is not Sub-Inspector of Police, II Town P.S., as she knew the Sub-Inspector of Police, II Town Police Station, then he threatened her that he would kill her if she goes near him. She immediately called her son stating that somebody was taking away her daughter in a car. She further stated that when the, accused were taking away her daughter, she caught the car door tightly, but they pushed her hands back and took away her daughter. Then her son came out and identified the driver of the car who used to visit brandy shop and also identified the car number. Herself and her son ran after the car to some extent and they came back to their house. They called out their neighbours saying that somebody took away her daughter. She along with her son went to the Police Station and gave a complaint. By the time they returned back to their home, they found PW2 weeping. On enquiry, she narrated the entire incident to them. In the cross-examination, nothing could be extracted from her contrary to what has been stated in the chief-examination. She identified the accused in the identification parade. Her statements were recorded by the Police under Section 161 Cr.PC as well as by the Magistrate under Section 164 Cr.PC.