The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of considering the circumstances and the victim's fear in cases of sexual offenses. The judgment also emphasizes the significance of medical evidence in corroborating the victim's testimony.

( 1 ) THIS common judgment shall dispose of the aforesaid two appeals as they arise out of judgment dated 18-1-1997 in Sessions Trial No. 76/1992 passed by IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Vidisha, convicting the appellants under Section 376 (2) (G) Indian Penal Code and under Section 506, Part II Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to ten years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default one year's rigorous imprisonment under Section 376 (2) (G) Indian Penal Code, and sentencing them to one year's rigorous imprisonment under Section 506 (Part-II) Indian Penal Code. Both the sentences were to run concurrently.

( 2 ) APPELLANTS were tried for offences under Section 376 (2) (G) of Indian Penal Code and Section 506 (Part-II) of Indian Penal Code and Section 3 (1) (x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. However, the appellants were acquitted of the charge under Section 3 (1) (x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and convicted and sentenced as stated above.

( 3 ) THIS fact, in particular, had not been disputed that prosecutrix PW-2 Kumari Lusiya, aged about 28 years, was at the time of incident posted as an Assistant Teacher in Government Primary School, Bagod. She was living all alone in the village.

( 4 ) PROSECUTION story runs thus that on 4-3-1992 prosecutrix Kumari Lusiya was returning from Vidisha to village Bagod to attend her School. She boarded Maheshwari Bus at 11. 30 a. m. at Vidisha and alighted from the Bus at about 1. 00 P. M. at a point called zero Chain Puliya from where her School at Bagod is about a kilometer away. After alighting from the Bus she proceeded on foot towards her School to village Bagod. At a nearby place where she alighted from the Bus there is a tapara of Chowkidar named Baldar Khan who was cited as prosecution witness, but was not examined by the prosecution, instead was examined as defence witness. The prosecutrix noticed three persons standing near tapara of Baldar Khan who were talking among themselves. She passed from nearby the tapara of Baldar Khan and had hardly gone some distance when she suspected someone following her. She noticed that those three persons were following her. After she had covered some distance, she again felt as if someone had come closer to her and therefore, she moved on one side giving way to the persons coming behind to go ahead. But the persons coming behind did not overtake her, instead caught hold her hands from behind. She did not like it and objected to this act of the accused. According to prosecutrix, it was appellant Maharajsingh who had caught hold her hands. She raised alarm calling the name of Baldar Khan but appellant accused Manarajsingh took out a knife and threatened her with dire consequences if she raised alarm. In the meantime, appellant Musabkhan also joined Maharajsingh and he showed a knife threatening her with dire consequences, if she raised any alarm. Then the two dragged her towards a canal at some distance. There also she tried to raise alarm, but again was threatned with dire consequences. There she was made to lie on the ground near a Babool tree. When she tried to raise alarm appellant Maharajsingh placed knife on her neck and thereafter tried to throttle her neck and thereafter she was forcibly made to lie on the ground near a Babool tree. Appellants Musab Khan and Malkhansingh then removed her clothes. She was at that time wearing salwar kurti. According to her, her salwar kurti and inner garments were also removed by the two appellants Musab Khan and Malkhansingh. The reafter, appellant Musab Khan was the first to have committed sexual intercourse with her followed by appellants Maharajsingh and Malkhansingh. Having satisfied their lust, they left the place and while leaving away appellant Musab Khan intimidated her that she will also meet the same fate which Madam Rekha of village Dhamoda met, if she made a re