PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.

1. The appellant (hereinafter referred to as accused for the sake of convenience) has preferred this appeal challenging the Judgment and Order dated 22.06.2007 passed by the Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge1, Baramati, District Pune, in Sessions Case No. 66 of 2004.

2. The accused was tried for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 376, 445, 457 and 404 of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC').

3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as follows:

(a) Deceased Manisha Ramchandra Karnale was the resident of Sangli. She had completed her graduation in BE (Electronics and Telecommunication). In the year 2003, she accepted the job in a company named Aanama Energies Pvt. Ltd. Pune. She was required to visit sites as part of her job. The employer of Manisha had taken job to install machinery of Parekh Food, Kurkumbh. Hence she was directed to join the work at Parekh Food, Kurkumbh, on 16.12.2003. Ajay Dumbre, Vikas Kattimani, Rakesh Jaiswal and Rakesh Supekar were the colleagues of Manisha. They were also directed to visit Parekh Food at Kurkumbh. Accordingly, they had resumed their duty on 15.12.2003. While working at Kurkumbh, Ajay Dumbre and his collea