BHANWAR Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH these appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment and findings dated 2nd February, 1993 passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Dhar in Sessions Trial No. 133 of 1991 thereby convicting the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 376, IPC and sentencing them for 10 years' RI each.

(2.) THE prosecution case in brief, was that on 7th April, 1991, in Village Aali, prosecutrix Rajjubai (P. W. 7) aged above 16 years, had gone to attend the marriage ceremony of her cousin brother Rama. After attending the marriage ceremony while she alone was returning to her house in the night at about 10. 00 PM, she was caught hold from her waist by the appellant and took her inside the garden owned by one Nandkishore of Village Aali. She tried to raise alarm but her mouth was gagged. She was laid down under the mango tree, thereafter appellant No. 1 Bhanwar committed sexual intercourse with her against her consent and Will. At that time co-appellant Ramnarayan was guarding them. It is, further, alleged that after performance of sexual intercourse by Bhanwar, Ramnarayan also committed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix against her consent and Will. After ravishing she was threatened not to disclose about this, to anybody. The prosecutrix, thereafter, reached at her house where she disclosed the incident to her mother, uncle Kailash (P. W. 1), father Nandu (P. W. 3) and Aunt Soumitibai (P. W. 5 ). On the next day i. e. , on 8-4-91 at about 11. 30 AM the prosecutrix lodged report in the police station on the basis of which, offence under Sections 376 and 506/34, IPC was registered. After completion of investigation charge-sheet was filed.

(3.) THE Trial Court framed charges against the appellants for the offences as mentioned above, which were denied by the appellants. According to them, they have been falsely implicated in the case. Their defence was that they were taken from their house by Thanedar Bhadodia in a theft case but thereafter, they have been falsely implicated at the instance of Nandu (P. W. 3) who was village Choukidar, in a false case of rape with her own daughter. In defence, they have examined 2 witnesses Ramchand (D. W. 1) and Narsingh (D. W. 2) whereas the prosecution has examined as many as 8 witnesses and got proved in all 11 documents,