These appeals are by accused Nos.1 and 2 directed

against the common judgment and order of conviction

dated 26.02.2014 by Additional District and Sessions

Judge, Gadag in SC No.20/2012. The appellants i.e.

accused Nos.1 and 2 are convicted for the offences

punishable under Section 366, 109 r/w 34 of IPC.

2.

The

accused

No.1

i.e.

appellant

in

Crl.A.No.100074/2014 is convicted and sentenced to

undergo simple imprisonment for 10 years for the offence

punishable under Section 366 r/w 34 of IPC and also to

pay fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default of payment of fine,

simple imprisonment of two years. Further accused No.1

is

convicted

and

sentenced

to

undergo

Rigorous

imprisonment for 10 years for the offence punishable

under Section 376 of IPC r/w Section 34 and shall pay fine

of Rs.15,000/- in default of payment of fine shall undergo

simple imprisonment for one year. Further, accused No.1

is

convicted

and

sentenced

to

undergo

simple

- 4 -

imprisonment for one year for the offence punishable

under Section 344 of IPC r/w 34 of IPC and shall pay fine

of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, undergo

simple imprisonment for six months.

3.

The appellant/accused No.2 in Crl.A.No.100073/2014

is

convicted

and

sentenced

to

undergo

rigorous

imprisonment for 10 years for the offence punishable

under Section 366, 109 r/w Section 34 of IPC and shall

pay fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default of payment of fine,

undergo simple imprisonment for one years. It is further

ordered that, out of fine amount, a sum of Rs.25,000/- is

ordered to be paid to the victim as compensation.

4.

Brief facts that would be necessary for disposal of

these appeals are that, accused No.2 i.e. appellant in

Crl.A.No.100073/2014

was

running

a

iron

shop

in

Vakkalegeri area and accused No.1 used to sit in the said

shop of accused No.2 and the victim in this case is used to

visit the shop of accused No.2 for getting iron of her

- 5 -

clothes and thereby accused No.1 used to talk to her for

about one year. On 13.05.2009 at about 5 p.m., accused

Nos.1 and 2 with common intention, accused No.1 with

the help of accused No.2 kidnapped the victim in an auto

rickshaw, in front of the house of complainant i.e. PW.1-

mother of the victim. As such, PW.1 being the mother of

the victim lodged the complaint before the respondent-

jurisdictional Police, on 20.05.2009 and the said Police

registered FIR in Crime No.71/2009 dated 20.05.2009 for

the offence punishable under Section 366 of IPC against

accused No.1 in this case.

5.

After registering the FIR, Police started investigation

and arrested the accused No.1 on 27.05.2009 and based

on his voluntary statement implicated accused Nos.2 and 3

in the crime and laid charge sheet against all the accused

for the offences punishable under Sections 366, 376, 344,

109 r/w 34 of IPC. Later, the case made over to Addl.

District and Sessions Judge, Gadag in SC No.20/2012 and

trial Court framed the charges against the accused No.1

- 6 -

for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 344 r/w 34

IPC. However, accused Nos.2 and 3 are concerned,

learned Sessions Judge framed the charges for the offence

punishable under Section 366, 344, 109 r/w 34 of IPC.

6.

Before trial Court, in order to prove the charges

leveled against accused, the prosecution in total examined

14 witnesses as PW.1-14 and also got marked 18

documents as Ex.P1-P18 and 8 material objects as M.O.

Nos.1 to 8. However, the accused neither examined any

witness nor produced any documents on their behalf. The

defence of the accused is one of total denial and that of

false implication.

7.

After assessment of oral and documentary evidence

available on record and also appreciating the arguments

advanced by both the counsels, learned Sessions Judge

passed the impugned judgment and convicted the accused

Nos.1 and 2 as stated supra. Being aggrieved by the said

judgment and order of conviction, appellant / accused

- 7 -

No.1 preferred Crl.A.No.100074/2014 and appellant /

accused No.