JUDGMENT

Revati Mohite Dere, J. - By this appeal, the appellant has impugned the judgment and order dated 25th April 2019, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Borivali Division, Dindoshi, Goregaon, Mumbai, in Special Case No.19 of 2016, convicting and sentencing him as under:

- for the offence punishable under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for 6 months;

- for the offence punishable under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for 6 months;

- for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for 6 months.

All the aforesaid sentences were directed to run concurrently.

In addition to the aforesaid sentences and fine, PW 2 (victim girl) was awarded compensation of Rs. 30,000/- under Section 357 of the Criminal Procedure Code r/w Victim Compensation Scheme (Manodhairya, Maharashtra) and as such the matter was referred to the District Legal Services Authority, Mumbai, for compliance.

2. The prosecution case in brief is as under :

According to PW 1-complainant, mother of the prosecutrix (PW 2), the incident took place on 8th January 2016. PW 1 has alleged that as her daughter (prosecutrix), aged 21 years and intellectually challenged, did not return home, she and her family went in search of her and that at about 10:00 p.m, they saw the prosecutrix returning home. When the prosecutrix was questioned as to why she was late, she informed that one person (appellant) had taken her to a fair on his bike and from there, in the bushes in Ghosh compound, where she was undressed. She disclosed that the said person had inserted his finger in her private part. The prosecutrix pointed out to the appellant who was answering the nature's call, close-by. When the appellant tried to flee from the spot on being pointed out, he was apprehended by the people and assaulted. The police were called and thereafter PW 1 (mother of the prosecutrix) lodged an FIR with the Dindoshi Police Station, Mumbai, which was registered vide C.R. No. 19/2016 for the offences stated aforesaid.

During the course of investigation, the statement of the prosecutrix was recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code and the prosecutrix was sent for medical examination. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed as against the appellant in the Court of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 67th Court, Borivali, Mumbai. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions since the offence under Section 376 was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions.

The learned Sessions Judge framed charge as against the appellant, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution, in support of its case, examined 13 witnesses i.e. PW 1- complainant and mother of the prosecutrix, who lodged the FIR (Exhibit 14); PW 2- prosecutrix; PW 3-PSI Deepak Golatkar, who received a wireless call about the incident and visited the spot and took the accused to the police station; PW 4-Mrs. Meena, neighbour of PW 2; PW 5-Mr. Subhash, neighbour of PW 2, who called the police by dialing "100" and gave information of the incident to the police; PW 6-Mrs. Kalpana, who accompanied the complainant and the prosecutrix to the police station; PW 7-Ms. Pallavi (hostile); PW 8-Dr. Poornima, Medical Officer, who examined the prosecutrix and prepared the medical report (Exhibit 23); PW 9-PSI Mr. Yogesh Patil (S.H.O.), who recorded the statement of PW 1 and registered the FIR and arrested the accused under arrest panchanama (Exhibit 26); PW 10-Mr. Nobendu Roy, who sold his motorcycle to the appellant, which was used in the commission o