- (1.) Since both the afore-captioned criminal appeals have been filed by the appellants challenging the judgment and order dated 18.02.2013 passed in the Sessions Trial No. 94 of 2011 arising out same case crime number, hence they are being decided by this common order.
(2.) Challenge in these appeals is to the judgment and order dated 18.02.2013 passed by Shri Chandrodya Kumar, learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Pilibhit in Sessions Trial No. 94 of 2011 (State vs Rakesh Kumar and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 631 of 2009, under sections 376 and 306 IPC, Police Station Jahanabad, district Pilibhit, whereby the accused-appellant Rakesh Kumar was convicted under section 376 IPC and sentenced to ten years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and accused-appellant Om Wati was found guilty under section 306 IPC and sentenced to ten years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 8000/- with default stipulation. The accused Pooja being a juvenile, her case was separated.
(3.) Brief facts of the case are that an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved by the informant Deen Dayal on 24.04.2009 stating that on 17.01.2009 his daughter aged 14 years at 8.00 p.m. had gone towards the west of the village to attend the call of nature, where she was caught by accused Rakesh Kumar, who raped her. When the victim returned home, she narrated the incident to her brother and mother, at which brother and mother of the victim went to complain about the matter to the family members of Rakesh Kumar, at which, Rakesh Kumar's father Nathu Lal, his mother and sister Pooja started abusing the informant, who came back home and did not lodge any report due to fear and reputation of family in the society. On 19.04.2009 at 7 O'clock, the victim was passing in front of the house of the accused, she was carrying cow-dung, at which Nathu Lal, his wife and Pooja, who were standing at their door passed comments on the victim that in spite of such an incident, she is still alive and has not died. The victim came back home and drunk insecticide in the house. She was taken to the hospital, where she died. Postmortem was conducted on her body. After cremation, the informant went to lodge the FIR, but the FIR was not lodged, then he sent an application by Registered Post to the SSP, Pilibhit, but when no action was taken, he moved an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C., on which an order was passed for registration of the FIR. Thereafter, investigation started, which ended into filing of the charge sheet against the accused persons.;