DHOLYA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against judgment dated 17.12.2003 of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Behror, in Sessions Case No.66/2003 (29/2003), whereby all four accused-appellants, namely, (1) Dholya @ Rajendra, (2) Lalaram, (3) Sunil @ Sunya @ Rajendra and (4) Guddu @ Rakesh, have been convicted for offence under Section 376(2)(g) and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/- each, in default of payment of fine, they were to further undergo three months simple imprisonment. They have been also convicted for offence under Sections 363 and 366A IPC, and for each offence they have been sentenced to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment with payment of fine of Rs.300/- each. In default of payment of fine, they were to further undergo two months simple imprisonment. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) Facts giving rise to this appeal are that a written report (Exhibit P-5) was submitted by one Minakshi with Police Station Shahjahanpur on 23.04.2003 alleging therein that she had gone to the jungle for answering the call of nature around 7.00 pm on 22.04.2003. While returning back when she reached near the house of Sarpanch, accused Guddu @ Rakesh Meena called her from behind and asked her to stay. When she turned back, three more boys were standing there. They were Dholya @ Rajendra S/o Dhundmal, Lalaram S/o Bheinram and Sunil @ Sunya @ Rajendra S/o Udharam. All these four accused forcibly caused her to sit in a jeep and inside the jeep they tied her mouth with her 'chunni'. Thereafter, they took her to jungle near a hill, where they, one after another committed rape upon her one after another. They asked her not to disclosed this to anyone. They threatened that if she disclosed this incident to any of her family members, they would murder her and her parents. The accused then brought her to the playground of Senior Secondary School, where they warned her not to tell this incident to anyone and caused her to sit in the jeep silently. So soon they came out of the ground of the school, they saw her uncle (tauji) and Shishupal searching for her. Her uncle and Shishupal followed the jeep on their motorcycle and intercepted it. They got her freed from the clutches of accused. They took her with them to her house. Action be taken against the culprits.

(3.) On the basis of aforesaid written report, the police registered a regular first information report being FIR No.79/2003 (Exhibit P-6), for offence under Sections 376(2)(g), 366, 34 IPC and investigation commenced. Challan against the accused-appellants was filed for the offence. The trial court framed the charges against the accused for offence under Sections 363, 366(a), 376(2)(g) of the IPC. Accused denied the charges and claimed to be tried. During the trial, the prosecution examined 11 witnesses and got 34 documents exhibited, whereas defence produced four witnesses, but did not get any document exhibited.