LAXMAN VILA GAIKWAD Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant-Original accused is challenging the judgment and" order of conviction and imposition of sentence passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar on 5th July, 2008 in Sessions Case No. 125/2006.

(2.) Accused was prosecuted for commission of offence punishable under section 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. Accused is held guilty for commission of offence punishable under Section 376 (1) of the indian Penal Code and is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default of payment of fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for one year. He is also held guilty for commission of offence punishable under Section 506 (11) of the Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years. It is directed by the trial Court that both sentences shall run concurrently.

(3.) In order to bring home guilt against the accused, prosecution has examined in all elevan witnesses. The Star witness on behalf of prosecution, of course, is prosecutrix herself P. W. 1. She has deposed before the court that she herself along with her parents, grand parents, are residing at village Mohoj khurd. At the relevant time, she was studying in 9th standard in New English School. Accused Laxman is from same village and he is her neighbour. The prosecutrix has stated that accused used to blow whistle at her and used to tell her that he is having love affair with her. Compliant, in that regard, was made by the prosecutrix to her grand mother shantabai some six months back. Her grand mother Shantabai convinced parents of accused Laxman, however, there was no improvement in the behaviour of Laxman and he used to tease the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix has stated about the occurrence of incident dated 23-4-2006. She has stated that while she had been towards river for latrine, at that time, accused came on spot and by extending threats to her, has committed rape on her person. It is stated by her that accused had committed rape on her person on two occasions. According to her, she resisted, however, accused did not budge and committed offence of rape on her. She has stated that she informed the matter to her father on the next day morning and thereafter they proceeded to lodge report against accused at police Station. In the cross-examination, she has stated that she is acquainted with the accused and his family members and that there are no disputes between herself and accused and his family members. She was asked, as to whether mother of the accused was Sarpanch of village panchayat, however, she has expressed her ignorance about it. She stated that while lodging report, it was reported by her to the police that she had disclosed the incident to her father, however, she cannot assign any reason as to why said fact is not appearing in her statement. So also, she having put resistance at the time of committing the act by accused is concerned, she states that she informed the police in that regard, however, she cannot assign any reason as to why the fact, that she put resistance while accused committed the act, is not mentioned in the report. The prosecutrix has also stated in her deposition before the Court that there are scratches on her back and hand only. It was suggested to her that, as she had slept on the rough surface near the river, she had sustained the abrasions to her back. Thus, the defence has suggested that abrasions on the back of prosecutrix are as a result of portion of her body coming in contact with rough surface on the bank of river.