MULSING KIMSHANSING CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS both these appeals arise out of the same impugned judgment and order, they are being disposed of by this common judgment. These appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 20. 09. 1995 passed by the learned Asst. Sessions Judge, Panchmahals at Godhra in Sessions Case No. 165/1993, whereby, the appellants, original accused, have been convicted for the offences punishable u/s. 452, 376 (g) and 114 IPC. For conviction u/s. 452 IPC, the appellants were sentenced to undergo R. I. for Three years with fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine, imprisonment for a further period of seven days. For conviction u/s. 376 (g) r/w. Section 114 IPC, the appellants were sentenced to undergo R. I. for Three years with fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine, imprisonment for a further period of fifteen days. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THE facts in brief of the prosecution case are as under;

(3.) MR. R. K. Savjani, learned Advocate appearing for appellant no. 1, original accused no. 1 and Mr. Nirad D. Buch, learned Advocate appearing for M/s. Nanavaty Advocates for appellant nos. 2 and 3, original accused nos. 2 and 3, have jointly submitted that the prosecution has not been able to prove the presence of all the three accused persons at the place of incident at the relevant point of time. They have submitted that the evidence of the prosecutrix could not be solely relied upon inasmuch as there are serious contradictions in it and that to on material aspects of the case.