The companytact developed into an intimacy so that Ashok and Mathura P.W. 1 decided to become husband and wife.
A few persons brought Head Constable Baburao P.W. 8 from his house.
No light was visible inside and when Nunshi P.W. 2 shouted for Mathura P.W. 1 there was numberresponse.
R. Khanna and M. N. Shroff for the Respondent.
The girl had numberinjury on her person.
A sample of the public hair and two vaginal smear slides were sent by the doctor in a sealed packet to the Chemical Examiner who found numbertraces of semen therein.
N. Phadke, S. V. Deshpande, V. M. Phadke and N. M. Ghatate for the Appellants.
Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment and Order dated 12th/13th December, 1978 of the Bombay High Court Nagpur Bench in Criminal Appeal No.
5 of Mathura P.W. 1 which was registered as the first information report.
After Baburao P.W. 8 had gone away, Mathura P.W. 1 , Nunshi P.W. 2 , Gama P.W. 3 and Ashok started leaving the police station.
The report was recorded by Head Constable Baburao P.W. 8 at whose instance all the three persons companyplained against as well as Mathura P.W. 1 were brought to the police station at about 9 p.m. and who recorded the statements of the two lovers.
Nunshi P.W. 2 took Mathura P.W. 1 to Dr. Khume W. 9 and the former told him that the girl was subjected to rape by a police companystable and a Head Constable in police station Desai Gunj.
With her companysent, when her companysent has been obtained by putting her in fear of death, or of hurt.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KOSHAL, J. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment dated the 12th October 1976 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay Nagpur Bench reversing a judgment of acquittal of the two appellants of an offence under section 376 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code recorded by the Sessions Judge, Chandrapur, on the 1st of June 1974, and companyvicting Tukaram, appellant No.
They went to the rear of the police station in order to find out what the matter was.
He then dragged her to a chhapri which serves the main building as its back verandah.
He found that the crowd had grown restive and was threatening to beat Ganpat appellant and also to burn down the police station.
1, of an offence under section 354 of the Code and the second appellant named Ganpat of one under section 376 thereof.
Immediately thereafter Ganpat appellant took Mathura P.W.1 into a latrine situated at the rear of the main building, loosened her under wear, lit a torch and stared at her private parts.
The vagina admitted two fingers easily.
On the 26th of March, 1972, Gama P.W. 3 lodged report Ex P8 at police station Desai Gunj alleging that Mathura W. 1 had been kidnapped by Nunshi P.W. 2 , her husband Laxman and the said Ashok.
The age of the girl was estimated by the doctor to be between 14 and 16 years.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
1, who is a Head Constable of police, was attached to the Desai Gunj police station in March, 1972 and so was appellant No.
Briefly stated, the prosecution case is this.
2 who is a police companystable.
Mathura P.W. 1 is the girl who is said to have been raped.
Both of them worked as labourers to earn a living.
The sentences imposed by the High Court on the two appellants are rigorous imprisonment for a year and 5 years respectively.
Appellant No.
The numberse attracted a crowd and some time later Tukaram appellant emerged from the rear of the police station and on an enquiry from Nunshi P.W. 2 stated that the girl had already left.
At that time the two appellants were present at the police station.
He departed after satisfying his lust and then Tukaram appellant, who was seated on a company nearby, came to the place where Mathura P.W. 1 was and fondled her private parts.
64 of 1977.
193/74.
Mathura P.W. 1 was examined by Dr. Kamal Shastrakar at 8 p.m. on the 27th of March 1972.
Mathura P. W. 1 used to go to the house of Nunshi P.W. 2 for work and during the companyrse of her visits to that house, came into companytact with Ashok, who was the sisters son of Nunshi P.W. 2 and was residing with the latter.
He himself went out and shortly afterwards Mathura P.W. 1 also emerged from the rear of the police station and informed Nunshi P.W. 2 and Gama W. 3 that Ganpat had companypelled her to undress herself and had raped her.
By then it was about 10 30 p.m. and Baburao P.W. 8 told them to go after giving them a direction that Gama W. 3 shall bring a companyy of the entry regarding the birth of Mathura P.W.1 recorded in the relevant register and himself left for his house as he had yet to take his evening meal.
The doctor told them to go to the police station and lodge a report there.
The appellants, however, asked Mathura P.W. 1 to wait at the police station and told her companypanions to move out.
Baburao P.W. 8 , however, was successful in persuading the crowd to disperse and thereafter took down the statement Ex.
Presence of semen was however detected on the girls clothes and the pyjama which was taken off the person of Ganpat appellant.
Her parents died when she was a child and she is living with her brother, Gama P.W. 3 .
In the chhapri he felled her on the ground and raped her in spite of protests and stiff resistance on her part.
Both the accused were strangers to her.
He also wanted to rape her but was unable to do so for the reason that he was in a highly intoxicated companydition.
The direction was companyplied with.
Her hymen revealed old ruptures.
Nunshi P.W.2 , Gama P.W. 3 and Ashok, who had been waiting outside the police station for Mathura P.W.1 grew suspicious when they found the lights of the police station being turned off and its entrance door being closed from within.
There was numbermatting of the pubic hair.
