Lok Pal Singh, J.

All these criminal appeals have arisen out of judgment and order dated 05.12.2013 passed by Additional Sessions Judge V, Dehradun. Hence, they are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. Though, criminal jail appeal no. 29 of 2006 has been filed by accused/appellant Mehboob Hasan from jail, which was received by this Court through Superintendant, District Jail, Dehradun, he is already an appellant in criminal appeal no. 264 of 2014, as the same has been filed on his behalf and on behalf of co-accused/appellant Sanu Ahmad @ Sonu by their counsel.

2. Above-noted criminal appeals have been preferred against the judgment and order dated 05.12.2013 passed by Additional Sessions Judge-V, Dehradun in Sessions Trial No.163 of 2012, whereby said court has convicted the accused/appellants Deepak Chaudhary, Muntzir, Sanu Ahmed @ Sonu, Mehboob Hasan, Atul Trivedi and one another under Sections 342, 376(2)(g) and 323 of The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, IPC). Under Section 342 IPC, all the convicts have been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year along with a fine of Rs.1,000/- each; under Section 376(2)(g), they have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years along with a fine of Rs.50,000/- each, and under Section 323 IPC all the convicts were sentenced to undergo one year R.I. Convict Sanu Ahmed @ Sonu has also been convicted under Section 506 IPC and has been sentenced to three years’ R.I. along with a fine of Rs.2,000/-. Remaining convicts were acquitted of the charge of offence punishable under Section 506 IPC. All the convicts were acquitted of the charge of offence punishable under Section 120B IPC. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently by the trial court.

3. Briefly put, prosecution story is that on 20.06.2012 prosecutrix lodged a report at P.S. Patel Nagar, Dehradun stating therein that she is preparing for M.B.A. One month back, she came in contact with the accused Dipesh Pandey, who sent her with the appellant Atul Trivedi saying that he will help her in finding a suitable job. Thereafter the appellant Atul Trivedi took her to Dehradun and arranged her stay in a rented house at Brahampuri. The prosecutrix alleged that she was confined in a room and time to time the accused/appellants used to come and commit rape with her and also used to beat her. She alleged that somehow she called at Helpline No.100 and narrated the entire incident. Sometimes later, she could know names of the accused persons. On the basis of report, chik F.I.R. was prepared and case crime no.121/2012 was registered against the accused/appellants in respect of offences punishable under Sections 342, 376(2)(g), 323, 506 and 120-B of IPC. On the same day i.e. on 20.06.2012, prosecutrix was medically examined by PW2 Dr. Archana Pandey, Emergency Medical Officer, District Women Hospital, Dehradun. The medical officer advised vaginal smear examination and x-ray of the prosecutrix, whereafter, supplementary report was prepared wherein it was opined that the prosecutrix is more than 18 years and no definite evidence of rape can be given. The investigation of the case was handed over to PW8 Sub Inspector Priyanka Rawat. On 21.06.2012, statement of prosecutrix was recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate. During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer recorded the statements of witnesses, visited the spot and prepared the site-plan, arrested the accused persons and upon completion of investigation, submitted charge sheet against the accused-appellants in respect of offences punishable under Section 342, 376(2)(g), 323, 506 and 120-B of IPC. The case of charge-sheeted accused Joya Vishwas was separated and registered as Case no. 4350 of 2012.

4. On receipt of charge sheet, Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Dehradun, committed the case to the court of Sessions for trial, after giving necessary copies to the accused persons