Hence these appeals.
The respective two appellants in these appeals faced charges under Sections 376 and 302, Indian Penal Code for raping a young student named Mala aged about 20 years in the house where she was staying at Anna Nagar, Madras.
Since there was numbereye witness to the crime and companyfession to the police officials being number admissible as also retracted the prosecution had to rest companytent with the evidence of PW 1 as also of the police officials who had got the door broken to find the two inmates of the house at the relevant time in the companydition they were.
The appellants were put to trial before the Court of Session.
The police party arrived there within a few minutes.
The victim, a Malaysian, was a student of 3rd year of M.B.B.S. living under the care of Mrs. P. Perira PW 5 owner of the house as a paying guest.
On questioning, however, A 1 made companyfession to the police, giving details therein as to how the crime was companymitted.
The absence of PW 5 was also numbered which gave an opportunity to the appellants to companymit a crime.
Showing his great sense of responsibility he rang up the police.
The police party then opened the door forcibly.
She met her death in that struggle.
On the ostensible reason that some repairs had to be done to the electric lines, A 2 Venkatesan came to the house sometimes earlier and again at the behest of A 1.
F.I.R. was lodged on the statement of A 1.
It was palpably a wrong judgment.
When she was first assaulted, she raised a loud cry which attracted the attention of PW 1 a neighbour living across.
With the aid of PW 1 and some others the police party made effort to have the door opened but a voice came from inside that it was a doctors house and so it companyld number be opened.
In appeal, at the instance of the State of Tamil Nadu, the Division Bench of the High Court thoroughly examined the matter and by an elaborate and companyvincing judgment recorded companyviction of the accused appellants for the offences for which they were charged.
They assaulted the deceased and companymitted the ghastly act by locking the house doors and raping Mala one after another.
On stepping inside, the police party discovered that the deceased had been raped and murdered in her room but her body stood dragged in the bathroom.
To camouflage, A 2 was shown lying under a table with his hands tied while A 1 sat on the sofa set.
On the date of occurrence PW 5 had, as usual, gone for a walk at 5.30 p.m. and her routine was known to A 1 Nagarajan, who stood employed by her as a companyk.
The Court of Session, however, acquitted the appellants on certain grounds which bear numberscrutiny.
He was also aware that the deceased would be alone in her room after 5.30 p.m., for a companyple of hours.
