SURESH N. BHUSARE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE three appellants were tried in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Nasik, in Sessions Case No. 117/83, for the offences punishable under sections 376 and 342 IPC. The trial Court acquitted them but their acquittal was reversed by the High Court. Therefore, they have filed this appeal.

(2.) IT was alleged against the appellant that on 28.7.83, at about 11 O'clock, they committed rape of Gangu Bai when she had gone to the shop of appellant No. 1 for purchasing a match box. In order to prove its case, the prosecution had examined PW 3 - Gangu Bai and PW 4 - Shankar, brother -in -law of Gangu Bai. The prosecution had also led evidence of the doctor who had examined Gangu Bai. The circumstance that from the house of appellant No. 1, some beads of broken necklace of Gangu Bai were found, was also relied upon. The trial Court, however, found that the evidence of PW 3 -Gangu Bai could not be relied upon safely as it suffered from serious infirmities. Her evidence was found to be inconsistent with the FIR lodged by her on material aspects. The trial Court also took note of the fact that no injury was found on her person even though her version was that she was dragged and had in fact received some scratches. The trial Court also took into consideration the delay in filing the FIR. The circumstance that some beads of broken necklace of PW 3 - Gangu Bai were found in the house of appellant No. 1, was not believed as it was considered unnatural that even after four days, the appellant would have allowed the beads to remain there. For these reasons, the trial Court, acquitted the appellants.

(3.) MR . Jain, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, submitted that the High Court has committed a grave error in placing implicit reliance on the evidence of PW 3 - Gangu Bai as her evidence was not trustworthy and inconsistent with the evidence of PW 4, her brother -in -law.