1. The present Appeals are preferred by the appellant challenging the judgment delivered by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune on 26/2/2002 thereby convicting him (the accused) for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 376, 506 and 342 of the Indian Penal Code (Hereinafter referred to as “IPC”). By the impugned judgment, the appellant has been sentenced to suffer imprisonment of 7 years for the offence punishable under Section 376, sentence of 1 year for the offence punishable under Section 363 and for a period of 6 months each for the offences punishable under Sections 506 and 342 of IPC respectively. All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently. The present Appeal came to be admitted by this Court on 5/6/2002. The appellant was granted bail and is presently on bail. The appellant has preferred two Criminal Appeals challenging the very same judgment. However, at the outset the learned counsel Shri Apte submits that he would not press Criminal Appeal No. 491 of 2002 and would prefer to argue Criminal Appeal No. 345 of 2002. In such circumstances, Criminal Appeal No. 491 of 2002 is sought to be withdrawn and the appellant is permitted to do so. Criminal Appeal No. 491 of 2002 disposed of as such. Shri Apte prefers to argue Criminal Appeal No. 345 of 2002.

2. Today the matter is taken up for final hearing. Shri Abhaykumar Apte is representing the appellant and learned APP Shri Ajay Patil is representing the State. In order to appreciate the contentions raised in Appeal, it would be necessary to briefly refer to the case of the prosecution and the findings recorded by the Sessions Court about the guilt of the appellant. A complaint came to be filed by the complainant-Smt. Vimal (Prosecution Witness (PW) No. 1) on 7/8/2000 with Police Station Shirur alleging that she was subjected to forcible sexual intercourse after being abducted by the accused. In the complaint, the complainant categorically stated that on 5/8/2000, she was present at home all alone as her parents had left for conducting their daily chores and when she was performing some household work, the Accused approached her and by putting a piece of cloth in her mouth, he carried her on his shoulder from the adjoining fields and she was carried to a sugarcane field belonging to one Shri Mohan Rambhau Gaikwad. It is the specific case of the complainant that the accused then asked her to remove her clothes and committed sexual intercourse with her. It is her specific case in the complaint that this incident was repeated on 3 to 4 occasions and thereafter the accused tied her hands and after committing the act of sexual intercourse, he had taken precaution that she should not raise voice, by putting piece of cloth in her mouth. In the complaint it is stated that she was raped. Her hands came to be tied by accused and she was left in the field and the accused fled away. It is stated that she was kept in the field till the next day i.e. on 6/8/2000. She returned home and reported the incident to her parents and brother. Thereupon the complaint came to be lodged in the Police Station on 7/8/2000. The said complaint was recorded by the ASI, who has been examined as PW 7. On registration of the complaint, spot panchanama was carried out and the clothes of the prosecutrix came to be seized. The accused was arrested on 7/8/2000 and his clothes came to be seized under the Seizure Panchanama. On completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet came to be filed and the matter was committed to the Court of Sessions and the trial commenced. During the course of trial, the prosecution has examined 9 witnesses. The prosecutrix/complainant has been examined as PW 1. PW 3 is the brother of the complainant and PW 5 is the mother of the complainant. Two doctors have been examined by the prosecution as PW 8 to give an opinion about the age of the prosecutrix and PW 9 for the purpose of determining as to whether forceful sexual intercourse has been committed on the