Lakshman Uraon, J.

1. The appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 31.5.1997, passed by Sri J.K. Narayan, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Seraikella, in Sessions Trial No. 179 of 1993 (G.R. No. 545 of 1992), whereby and whereunder, all the three appellants have been convicted under Section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code and each of them has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- each and in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. They have further been convicted under Section 452 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years. However, the sentences in respect of all the appellants have been ordered to run concurrently.

2. The prosecution case is based on the First Information Report, lodged by Duni Purty (PW 8), recorded on 16.9.1992 at 18.30 hours regarding an occurrence, which took place in the night of 15/16th September, 1992 in between 9.00 p.m. of 15th September, 1992 till 3.00 a.m., the early morning of 16th September, 1992. The informant Duni Purty (PW 8) has alleged that in the night of 15.9.1992 she was sleeping in the house of her Bari Maa (aunt) along with Guruwari Bankira (PW 2), Bari Maa, Bhabhi Mansuri Bankira (PW 4), cousin sister Burhi Bankira (PW 5), where a dhibri was burning. At about 9.00 p.m. all of a sudden, appellant Sangi Hambram, Dusa Bankira and Mangal Singh Bankira along with two others, namely, Lukun Bankira and Jadav Bankira (both acquitted), entered into her room, Appellant Mangal Singh Bankira threatened her at the point of country made pistol and appellant Sangi Hambram and Dusa Bankira caught hold of her, threatening to cause her murder and lifted her by force and took out of the village at a distance of 1 km in a lonely place. All the three appellants Sangi Hambram, Dusa Bankira and Mangal Singh Bankira at the point of pistol by force committed rape upon her one after another, twice each repeatedly. Thereafter, she was taken near a pond where also she was ravished by appellant Sangi Hambram and Dusa Bankira, The other two co- accused, who have been acquitted, namely, Lukun and Jadav Bankira were guarding them from a nearby distance. As she was unable to stand up and walk, the appellants put her dresses on and they took her to her house and left her, threatening that if the matter is reported to the police, the entire family will be murdered. She narrated the entire incident to her mother and other family members, including brother, father and uncle, She became senseless off and on due to excessive rape on her. Next day she went to the police station along with her mother Mini Kui (PW 9), maternal uncle Lalji Bana and cousin brother Rajendra Purty (PW 7), where her statement was recorded and First Information Report was drawn for the offence under Sections 452 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The learned Court below framed charges under Section 452 and 376/34 of the Indian Penal Code, which was denied by these appellants. The prosecution in order to substantiate the charges, produced eleven witnesses. Out of them, PW 2 Gurubari Bankira, PW 3 Nagi Bankira, PW 4 Masuri Bankira, PW 5 Burhi Bankira, who were sleeping in the eventful night along with the informant Kumari Duni (PW 8) have not supported the prosecution case, as narrated by the informant in her First Information Report. They are either hostile or tendered witnesses. PW 6 Patar Hembram and PW 7 Rajendra Purty, who have signed on the First Information Report of the informant (Exts. 2 and 2/1 respectively) have not supported the case and are either hostile or tendered witnesses. PW 9 Mini Kui, mother of the informant, saw these appellants taking away her daughter, threatening her at the point of country made revolver, who was also bolted inside the room. PW 10 Saiyad Gulam, A.S.I., has simply submitted charge sheet whereas PW 11 Chandra Kishore Choudhary