- (1.) Both these appeals present a challenge to the judgment and order dated 20.2.1988 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Bharatpur, Camp at Bayana (Bharatpur) in Sessions Case No.108/1987 convicting the appellant under sections 366 and 376 IPC and sentencing him to suffer four years' rigorous imprisonment on each count & pay a fine of Rs.100/- each therefor and in default, to suffer further three months' R.I.
(2.) I have heard Mr.Harendra Singh with Mr.Rajesh Choudhary, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr.Javed Choudhary, learned Public Prosecutor.
(3.) The prosecution case is that on 29.4.1987, while Satya Prakash, A.S.I. of Police Station, Bayana, was on patrol duty, he on hearing loud screams of a girl from the Dharamshala of master Bhariya Ram, located at Majra Naya Bas, made enquiries. While visiting that place, there, she met the crying girl Sadhna, who was a minor and on interrogating her, she disclosed that about ten months before, the accused appellant and his wife Mst.Rumla had met her near Jhansi Railway Station and offered her to accompany them for better livelihood and comfortable living, on which she came alongwith them. In course of her narration, Sadhna further disclosed that she was thereafter put in that Dharamshala and that the accused appellant during her stay there, committed forcible sexual intercourse with her several times under threat of doing away her, if she resisted. Sadhna further revealed that the accused appellant and his wife also procured one more girl viz; Chandrakala, who was kept as well in the Dharamshala. The police officer lodged the F.I.R. in which he, amongst others, mentioned that the age of Sadhna and Chandrakala was ten years and 18 years respectively and that they had been recovered from the Dharamshala. A case was registered under sections 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, for short hereinafter referred-to as "the Code", and on completion of investigation, chargesheet was laid against the accused appellant, his wife Rumla and also one Shanti Devi, the mother of the latter. The accused persons denied the charge, when framed against them, for which the trial followed. The prosecution thereafter examined several witnesses including two victims & the doctors, who medically examined them for ascertaining their age as well as to assess the physical injuries suffered. At the conclusion of the trial, by the impugned judgment and order, the learned court below convicted and sentenced the appellant as above but acquitted the co accused, while extending to them the benefit of doubt.;