VINOD Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment shall govern disposal of both the appeals i. e. Criminal Appeal No. 232 of 2003 and Criminal Appeal No. 309 of 2003 as they arise out of a common judgment dated 31/3/2003, passed by the Third additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Guna (M. P.) in Sessions Trial No. 178 of 2001, whereby the Sessions Court has convicted the appellants in both the appeals for commission of offence under Section 376 (2) (g) of IPC and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each, in lieu six months rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) AS per prosecution story, accused Vinod was carrying on business of driving a jeep on hire. Brijmohan P. W. I was cleaner on the said jeep. On 12/03/2001 Vinod had brought his jeep from Raghogarh to Guna along with cleaner brijmohan P. W. 1. At Guna, they met Sahjad, Govind and Narayan Singh along with a deaf and dumb girl (prosecutrix P. W. 8 ). They boarded the jeep at Guna bus: stand along-with other passengers. Narayan Singh and Govind told Vinod that he will look after the girl till the evening and return her back in the evening. When the jeep returned to Raghogarh, all the passengers got down except the prosecutrix (P. W. 8 ). Vinod gave Rs. 50/- to Brijmohan and asked him to buy some food and come at the well of Moiya. Brijmohan P. W. 1 after purchasing food went to the well of Moiya where Govind, Narayan Singh and Vinod took the food. Thereafter, govind, Narayan and Vinod took the girl to the jungle where Govind; Narayan and vinod committed rape on her and left her near Astabhuja temple. Gopal, P. W. 7 met the prosecutrix at Astabhuja temple and took the prosecutrix to the police station Raghogarh where report was lodged.

(3.) ON the basis of the report, police registered crime no. 384 of 2001 against the accused as Ex. P/10. Co- accused Govind was absconding. Hence, the police after completion of investigation filed challan only against present appellants. The matter was committed to the Sessions Court where the Sessions Court framed the charge against the accused for commission of offence under Section 376 (2) (g) of IPC. After recording the evidence and appreciating the same, the Sessions Court convicted and sentenced the present appellants as stated herein-above. Hence, this appeal.