- (1.) The above two appeals are being decided by this judgment as they have been preferred by the accused appellants against the judgment and order dated 4.9.1997 passed by the learned Judge, Special Court (Women Atrocities and Dowry cases), Bhilwara in Sessions Case No. 65/ 1997 by which he convicted and sentenced the accused appellants in the following manner : JUDGEMENT_69_LAWS(RAJ)10_2000_1.html The above sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
(2.) The short facts giving rise to these appeals are as follows : On 24.2.1996, PW 6 Bherulal lodged a written report Ex. P/3 before the SHO, City Kotwali Bhilwara stating inter alia that his daughter PW 1 Smt. Kailash, aged about 17 years had disappeared for the last one month and since then he has been searching her, but he could not find her whereabouts, but today he found his daughter PW 1 Smt. Kailash in the Court premises, Bhilwara and saw two men and one woman with his daughter. It is further stated in the report that after seeing him (PW 6 Bherulal), they ran away and his daughter PW 1 Smt. Kailash started weeping and on being enquired where she remained for such period, PW 1 Smt. Kailash told him that accused appellant Rustam (driver) and wife accused appellant Smt. Shamim both after enticing her took from Mandal to Bhilwara and during this period, she was kept in the house of accused appellant Rustam and threat was given to her of dire consequences and accused appellant Rustam kept her in his house for 20 days and during these days, he used to commit rape on her and another accused appellant Smt. Shamim, wife of accused appellant Rustam also used to persuade her to have sexual intercourse with accused appellant Rustam and not only this, both accused appellants Rustam and Smt. Shamim invited another accused appellant Razak and they enticed her to marry with accused appellant Razak, but she refused and on her refusal, they threatened her to kill her and she has further stated that in these circumstances she has been brought to Court premises by all three accused appellants, namely, Rustam, Smt. shamim and Razak. Thereafter, PW 6 Bherulal lodged the above report and since the matter falls within the jurisdiction of Police Station Mandal, therefore, Thana Incharge, City Kotwali Bhilwara referred the matter to the Police Station Mandal, where PW 24 Heera Singh registered the regular FIR Ex. P/8 and started investigation. During investigation, medical exami- nations of accused appellants Razak, Rustam, Salim and Gopal were got conducted for testing their testimony about potency and medical examination of PW 1 Smt. Kailash for ascertaining her age was also got conducted by PW 16 Dr. Avdhesh Mathur, who has given his reports Ex. P/8 and Ex. P/9, where he has stated that the age of PW 1 Smt. Kailash is 18-19 years. A certificate Ex. P/16 was also obtained from the Government Girls Upper Primary School, Mandal, where the date of birth of one Miss Vimla is said to be 1.7.1979. Thereafter, accused appellants were arrested. After usual investigation, police submitted challan against the accused appellants in the Court of Magistrate and from where, the case was committed to the Court of Session and, thereafter, the case was transferred to Addl. Sessions Judge No. 2, Bhilwara. On 10.7.1996, the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Bhilwara framed the following charges against the accused appellants : (1) Smt. Shamim under Sections 366-A, 368 and 342, IPC. (2) Rustam under Sections 376, 368 and 344, IPC. (3) Razak under Sections 376, 368 and 342, IPC. (4) Gopal under Sections 376, 366 and 344, IPC. (5) Salim under Section 376, IPC. The charges were read over the explained to the accused appellants. They denied charges and claimed trial. In support of its case, the prosecution examined as many as 24 witnesses and got exhibited several documents and, thereafter, statement under Section 313, Cr PC were recorded, in which they denied all the allegations made against them. They did not lead any evidence in defence. The learned Judge, Special Court (Women Atrocities and Dowry Cases) Bhilwara, after relying on the statements of PW 1 Smt. Kailash, convicted and sentenced the accused appellants through his judgment and order dated 4.9.1997 in the manner as stated above. Aggrieved from the said judgment and order dated 4.9.1997 passed by the learned Judge, the accused appellants have preferred these two appeals. In these appeals, the following contentions have been raised by the learned counsel for the accused appellants : 1. That the learned trial Court has erred in holding the accused appellants guilty of the charges framed against them, inasmuch as, there is no corroboration of the statements of PW 1 Smt. Kailash and furthermore, medical evidence does not support her statement and from medical evidence also, she should be adjudged as above the age of 18 years and thus, no case of rape and abduction is made out against the accused appellants. 2. That PW 1 Smt. Kailash and accused appellant Rustam remained for so many days in one house and moved from one place to another freely and during this period, no complaint was made by PW 1 Smt. Kailash and thus, from this point of view also, no case of rape and abduction is made out against the accused appellants. Hence, it was prayed that accused appellants be acquitted of the charges framed against them.
(3.) On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor supported the impugned judgment and order of the learned trial Judge.;