SHAMRAO SHIVRAM AKHADE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
LAWS(BOM)-1972-9-12
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Decided on September 28,1972

SHAMRAO SHIVRAM AKHADE Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THIS is an appeal filed by the original accused Nos. 1 and 3 against their convictions by the Additional Sessions Judge. Poona, accused No. 1 being convicted of the substantive offences under Sections 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, and accused No. 3 being convicted of the offence of abetment of kidnapping under Section 366 read with Section 109, of the Indian Penal Code. It may be mentioned that accused No. 3 was also charged with the offence of abetment of rape under Section 376. read with Section 109, of the Indian Penal Code, but he has been acquitted of the same by the trial Court. It may also be mentioned that accused No. 2 was similarly convicted of the offence under Section 366, read with Section 109, of the Indian Penal Code, but acquitted of the offence under Section 376 read with Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code. Accused No. 2 has not filed any appeal from her conviction and she is not an appellant before this Court.
(2.) THE facts out of which the prosecution case arises are that a married girl named Shalan used to live with her husband Shrirang and her mother-in-law Gopabai in a hut at Mangalwar Peth. Poona. the prosecution case being that Shalan was born on 30th October, 1955. and was less than 16 years of age at the material time. The prosecution story is that, in course of time. Shalan become acquainted with some of her neighbours, including accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3, and used to exchange visits with them. According to the prosecution, about two days prior to 13th February 1971. Shalan had been to the house of accused No. 2 in order to ask her to accompany Shalan for collecting firewood, but when she went inside the house of accused No. 2, accused No. 2 came out and bolted the front door and accused No. l entered the hut from the rear and had sexual intercourse with Shalan. That, however, is not the subject-matter of the present case and has been narrated by me only as part of the prosecution story.
(3.) ON the 13th of February 1971. according to the prosecution. Shalan's husband Shrirang left his house for work at Mal-dhakka in the morning and. after doing her husband's work. Shalan took the tiffin-carrier for him to his place of work at Mal-dhakka, but Shrirang was not there, he having gone to Kirkee. and so she returned home with tiffin-carrier. Thereafter she took her own meals, and then her motherin-law Gopabai asked her to bring a pot from the house of Gopabai's married daughter and Shalan left the house for that purpose. The prosecution story is that, on the way, she met accused No. 2 who asked Shalan to accompany her and took Shalan to a bus-stop, where accused No. 3 joined them and the two accused took Shalan by bus to the house of Watchman Mohite at another village where they all spent the night after obtaining the consent of the said Mohite. Next day, according to the prosecution, the first accused came there with one other person, and after some intervening facts relating to the ornaments of Shalan, to which it is unnecessary to refer for the purposes of the present appeal, according to the prosecution, the first accused took Shalan to a railway station, and, underneath the railway-bridge, he had sexual intercourse with Shalan, accused Nos. 2 and 3 having left Mohite's house and gone away from there on their own. The prosecution story is that thereafter accused No. 1 took Shalan to Bombay where the two of them lived for about 3 days at Worli and for about 8 days at Andheri, and accused No. 1 then brought Shalan to Poona and. on her request, took her to the house of her parents at Ojani. Shalan's father thereupon contacted Shrirang as well as the Police, and accused No. 1 and Shalan were brought by the Police to Poona on the 10th of March 1971 and the usual investigation by the Police followed. As a result of that investigation, accused No. 1 was charged with the substantive offence of kidnapping and rape under Sections 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code respectively and accused Nos. 2 and 3 were charged under Sections 366 read with Section 109 and 376 read with Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code with haying abetted accused No. 1 in the commission of both those offences. They were thereafter tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Poona. and were convicted and sentenced on the 21st of April 1972, as already stated above. From their convictions and the sentence passed upon them accused Nos. 1 and 3 have preferred the present appeal.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.