A.M. THIPSAY, J.}

1. The Appellant was the original Accused No.2 in Sessions Case No.211 of 2002, which was tried by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik. The learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the Appellant of an offence punishable under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and also of an offence punishable under Section 376(2) (g) of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Additional Sessions Judge sentenced the Appellant to suffer R.I. for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.300/with respect to the offence punishable under Section 366 of the IPC, read with Section 34 of the IPC, and R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs.500/with respect to the offence punishable under Section 376(2) (g) of the IPC. The Appellant, being aggrieved by the said judgment and order of conviction and sentence, has appealed to this Court.

2. I have heard Mr. M.S. Karnik, the learned Counsel for the Appellant, and Smt. V.R. Bhosale, the learned APP for the Respondent-State. I have been taken through the evidence adduced before the trial Court. I have also been taken through the impugned judgment and order.

3. The case of the prosecution before the trial Court was as follows:.

The prosecutrix, (name not mentioned in order to ensure nondisclosure of identity), who was at the material time unmarried, was residing with her parents. The father of the prosecutrix was an agriculturist and the family of the prosecutrix used to work in the fields. That, on 19th October, 2010, the parents of the prosecutrix had gone to the field. However, as the prosecutrix was suffering from headache, she had not gone with them and had remained at the residence. That, at about 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m., the headache stopped and as the prosecutrix felt alright, she started going to the field. That, when the prosecutrix had reached near the field of one Rangnath Thamake, which is situate at some distance from the field of the family of prosecutrix, the original Accused No.1 Rajaram Kalu Namede came there in a jeep. The prosecutrix knew him, he being the resident of the same village as that of the prosecutrix, namely, Ganeshgaon. The said original Accused No.1 caught hold of the hand of the prosecutrix and took her inside the jeep. The prosecutrix asked him to leave her hand, but the original Accused No.1 did not release the hand. That, he started taking the jeep to the side of Ozarkhed Road. While on the way, the Appellant came from the opposite direction in a tempo. That, the Appellant stopped the tempo by the side of the road and got into the jeep. The Appellant started driving the jeep. The original Accused No.1 then put his hand around the body of the prosecutrix by coming on the back side seat. He touched the breast of the prosecutrix with his hand, causing scratches on her body. The jeep reached to Ozarkhed Bari. The Appellant stopped the jeep. The Appellant went out of the jeep and waited by the side of the jeep. The original Accused No.1 then removed his clothes, removed the clothes of the prosecutrix and had sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix, though the prosecutrix had tried to push him and to remove him from her person. The original Accused No.1 had threatened her that if she would disclose about the incident to anyone, then he would kill her. Thereafter, the original Accused No.1 dropped the prosecutrix near a bridge Shivangaon Farshi. At that time, the original Accused No.1 again threatened the prosecutrix.

The prosecutrix then went to her home. Her parents returned from the field at about 7:00 p.m. On the next day, the prosecutrix told about the incident to her parents.

The matter was thereafter reported to the Police. Subhashchandra Shivajirao Borse (PW5), attached to Trimbakeshwar Police Station at that time, recorded the statement of the prosecutrix and treated the same as the First Information Report (Exhibit26). On the basis thereof, a case in respect of offences punishable under Sections 366 IPC,