The main legal point established is the requirement for expert evidence to establish the victim's mental condition and the importance of medical evidence supporting the charge of rape.

JUDGMENT :

SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.

1. The appellant-accused who has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 342 and 376 of IPC by the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai in Sessions Case No.77/2008 questioned the legality and correctness of his conviction and sentence for life imprisonment on various grounds.

2. The prosecution case in nutshell is as under. The victim who is adult stated to be a patient of schizophrenia, a mental disease. On 7th March 2008 around 1.30 p.m. she boarded one auto-rickshaw which was driven by the appellant-accused and asked him to take her for roaming. The victim was taken to Jogaiwadi Guest House at about 3.00p.m.. The appellant had taken room No.B/2. It is the case of the prosecution that the appellant committed rape on the victim in the said room. Any how the victim raised hue and cry for help. The Manager of the said guest house rushed to the room and gave call. The door was opened and victim came out of the room and ran outside the guest house. She approached to two rickshaw drivers who were at rickshaw stop and narrated the incident to them, when they made enquiry with her as to why she was crying. Those two rickshaw drivers caught accused and brought the victim and the appellant to Madh Beat police Chowki. The Police Officer attached to Madh Beat police Chowki made enquiry with the victim. The victim narrated the incident to the police officer. The victim girl and the appellant were brought to Malwani Police Station. Police Constable, Nitin Shinde, lodged the FIR against the appellant-accused on the basis of narration given by victim. On the basis of FIR lodged by the police Constable-Shinde, Crime No.56/2008 under Section 376 of IPC came to be registered at Malwani Police Station.

3. The investigation was entrusted to API, Manohar Harpude. He arrested the accused and seized clothes of the victim girl. The panchnama of scene of offence came to be prepared. Victim was referred for medical examination at Nagpada Police Hospital. Investigation Officer could not record the statement of the victim girl as she was not in a position to narrate about the incident. Remaining part of investigation was conducted by Police Inspector-Jamdade (PW No.11) who recorded statement of two auto rickshaw drivers who brought the victim girl at Madh Beat police Chowki. He despatched the mudemal articles to the forensic laboratory for analysis and report. After completion of investigation, the investigation officer found sufficient evidence against the appellant-accused. The chargesheet came to be filed in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate at Borivali, Mumbai who committed this case to the Sessions Court, Greater Mumbai, Dindoshi Sessions Division, Mumbai.

4. The learned Additional Sessions Judge framed the charge against the appellant-accused for the offences punishable under Section 376 and 342 of IPC. The accused pleaded not guilty and the trial was commenced. The prosecution machinery has examined in all 11 witnesses. Apart from that the prosecution agency has also pressed into service documentary evidence in the form of panchnamas, reports of chemical analyser and medical certificate of victim.

5. The learned Additional Sessions Judge after appreciating the evidence on record and considering the argument advanced on behalf of prosecution and the defence was pleased to hold the appellant-accused guilty for the offences punishable under Section 342 and 376 of IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and slapped total fine of Rs.11,000/- with default stipulation.

6. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order of conviction rendered by Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai (Sessions Division, Dindoshi), the appellant-accused has challenged the decision on various grounds by way of this appeal under Section 374 of Cr.P.C.

7. Heard Mr. M.M. Khokhawala, learned C