- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the appellants Sri Sudhir Kumar Singh, Sri D.P. Upadhyaya and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent.
(2.) BY means of this appeal the appellants (Ashok Kumar, Ram Deen & Ramesh Kahar) have challenged the judgment dated 19.1.1990, passed by Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Unnao , in Session Trial No. 401 of 1989, in the case of ' State vs. Ashok Kumar & others' under Section 376 I.P.C., Police Station Asoha, District Unnao, whereby the learned trial court convicted the appellants for the offence under Section 376 (2) I.P.C. and each of the appellants was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years. In brief, facts of the case are that the complainant P.W. -1 (hereinafter referred to as 'Victim') is a married girl aged about 18 years. Her parental village is Mangataiya, police station Mohanlalganj, district Lucknow and she was married in village Indaura, police station Morawan, district Unnao. On 29.6.1989 one Shyam Lal who belongs to the caste of the complainant and as per the caste relations happens to be her uncle came to village Indaura to invite Ramswaroop. Shyam Lal also visited the house of the victim and from there he had to go back to village Mangtaiya. Since the marriage of the cousin of the victim was to be solemnized on 30.6.1989, therefore, she requested Shyam Lal to took her to the village Mangtaiya with him because there was no male member in her house. Shyam Lal accepted her request and she along with her daughter Renu, aged about two and half years, went with Shyam Lal. When these persons reached village Khajha at about 8.00 p.m. near the bank of river 'Sai', Shyam Lal called the boatman because boat was on the other side of the river. Meanwhile Ashok Kumar resident of village Mangataiya and Ram Deen, resident of village Bairi and Ramesh Kahar of village Nagram reached there and and these persons forcibly took the victim towards the 'Babool tree' when the victim made effort to raise alarm then Ashok Kumar gagged her mouth. Her uncle Shyam Lal also made effort to raise alarm,but the appellants threatened him with dire consequences because of which he could not resist. Accused -appellant Ashok Kumar grounded the victim and committed rape with her. After satisfying his lust, the other accused Ram Deen committed rape with her. Thereafter Ramesh Kahar also committed rape with the victim. On raising alarm by Shyam Lal and the victim, Rajesh Kumar alias Raju Pandit, Rampal kahar and several other persons of village Khajuha reached there. The accused persons made an effort to make good their escape but the villagers who reached there apprehended all the accused appellants while they were making an effort to run away by crossing the river. Victim, Shyam Lal and all the three accused/appellants remained in village Khaujha in the night. Information was given to the police outpost. In the morning two constables reached there. Then victim along with accused persons went to the police station and gave his report as Ext. K -1 which was scribed by his uncle Shiva Naiyae on her dictation. On the basis of this report case crime no. 55 of 1989 under Section 376 (g) was registered and chik report Ext. Ka -8 and G.D. Ext. Ka -9 were prepared. Investigating Officer took the petticoat of the victim, which had white spots, in custody, prepared its memo Ext. Ka -2, Torches of witnesses were also taken into custody, its memo is Ext. Ka -5, site plan Ext. Ka 6 was prepared. Victim was got medically examined and after completion of investigation, charge sheet Ext. Ka 7 was filed.
(3.) IN order to prove its case prosecution examined P.W. -1 complainant/victim, P.W. -2 Shiva, Scribe of the First Information Report, P.W. -3 Dr. Suman Mishra who medically examined the victim, P.W. -4 Shyam Lal, eye witness of this occurrence, P.W. -5 Rajesh Kumar @ Raju Pandit, who along with other persons had seen the occurrence and apprehended the appellants on the place of occurrence and before this witness appellants made extra judicial confession of their guilt. P.W. -6 is Chandra Bhan Singh, Investigating Officer. Case of the defense is that they have been falsely implicated in this case because of enmity. No defense evidence was produced on behalf of the appellants during trial. Learned trial court on the basis of the evidence available on record convicted the appellants, as above, hence this appeal.;