Honble MATHUR, J.–This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 3.12.98 passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases cum Addl. Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh, convicting the appellant of offence under Section 376 IPC and sentencing him to `seven years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. one thousand and in default, to further undergo three months rigorous imprisonment. The appellant has also been convicted for the offence under Section 366 IPC and sentenced to five years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. five hundred and in default, to further undergo two months rigorous imprisonment. He has further been convicted of offence under Section 3(2) (v) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, hereinafter referred-to as `the S.C./S.T. Act and sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. five hundred and in default, to further undergo two months simple imprisonment. All the substantive sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

(2). The brief facts of the case are that on 20.06.1992 at about 7.30 AM, one Mst. Laxmi lodged an oral First Information Report at Police Station, Pratapgarh, stating inter alia that on the last evening at about 8 PM, she alongwith three other girls namely Kanta, Bhuri and Kani were at the Bus Stand, Banswara awaiting bus for going to Surpur. At that time, the truck bearing No. NP41-A5271 arrived and the driver of the truck offered them to board the truck and assured that he would drop them at their respective destinations, Accordingly, they boarded and occupied the seats in the cabin of the truck. The driver did not stop the truck at Surpur inspite of their protest and proceeded towards Suhagpura. The truck was stopped on the way prior to Suhagpura. They were asked to get down. Another truck also arrived there. The accused persons asked Bhuri and Kanta to board the other truck. Then, both the trucks moved together and passed through village Suhagpura. They stopped near village Timarva. The driver of the truck accused Pappu Khan committed rape on her in the cabin of the truck. On resistance, she was being assaulted. She also stated that accused Balu Committed rape on Mst. Bhuri. After committing rape, they were being taken in unknown direction. At about 5 AM when truck stopped at Dhariavad Octroi Outpost, they saw some policemen standing. Seeing them, they raised cry which attracted the attention of the policemen. The driver and the Khalasi seeing the policemen jumped the truck and ran away. They got down from the truck and narrated the entire incident to the policemen. On this information, police registered a case of the offences under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of S.C./S.T. Act. Both the trucks were seized. The informant and the other girls were sent for medical examination. The accused persons were arrested. After usual investigation, police laid a chargesheet against the appellant Pappu Khan and accused Balu for the aforesaid offences.

(3). The accused appellants denied the charge and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case examined as many as eight witnesses and produced number of documents. Both the accused persons in their statements u/Sec. 313 Cr.P.C. stated that they have been falsely implicated. As Mst. Bhuri did not appear in the witness box, the learned Judge found no evidence against the accused Balu and, therefore, acquitted him of the charges levelled against him. Relying on the testimony of prosecutrix Mst. Laxmi corroborated by medical evidence, the learned Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as stated above.

(4). Assailing the conviction it is contended by Mr. B.N. Kalla, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, that the learned trial Judge has committed error in convicting the appellant on the sole testimony of Mst. Laxmi without any corroborative evidence. Alternatively, it is submitted that it was case of consent and, as

Click Here to Read the rest of this document