Case Note & Summary
The criminal appeal before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Division Bench) stemmed from the conviction of the appellant-original accused no.1 and three others in Sessions Case No. 914 of 2013. The Sessions Court had convicted them under Sections 376(D) (gang rape), 377 (unnatural offences), 354(B) (assault or use of criminal force to woman with intent to disrobe), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 506(II) (criminal intimidation) read with Section 120-B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced them to rigorous imprisonment for life, meaning imprisonment for the remainder of their natural life, with fine and default sentence. The prosecution case detailed that on the evening of 31 July 2013, the prosecutrix, a telephone operator, and her boyfriend PW-19 Krishna, were walking towards Mahalaxmi temple when the prosecutrix injured her foot. Opting to return, they took a shortcut through the abandoned Shakti Mills compound. As they rested, they were assaulted by two men (later identified as accused no.2 and no.3). When PW-19 Krishna resisted, a third person appeared and dragged the prosecutrix into the shrubs. The appellant, who was the fourth person, gagged the prosecutrix with a handkerchief and threatened her. Despite her injured foot and pleas, one after another, the accused forcibly removed her clothes and perpetrated sexual intercourse. One accused tore his shirt in the struggle. After the first two accused raped her, one of them used a mobile phone to summon others, stating in Hindi, “esjk dke gks x;k rq vk tk” and “eky vkyk vkgs LikWV is vktk QVkQV”. Accused no.4 and a juvenile then arrived and also committed rape and unnatural sex, including anal and oral penetration. Thereafter, the prosecutrix was brought out, the boyfriend’s hands were untied, and both were taken to the railway track and threatened with dire consequences if they reported the incident. Traumatized and fearing her mother’s reaction, the prosecutrix did not want to go home. With PW-19 Krishna, she travelled to Chattisgarh and stayed with a friend for a month. Her mother had lodged a missing complaint on 1 August 2013. After returning on 1 September 2013, the prosecutrix confided in her mother, and on 2 September 2013, at Bhandup police station, she disclosed the ordeal to the police, leading to the registration of an FIR initially under sections 376(D), 323, 504 read with 34 IPC. The spot visit led to the recovery of her clothing and ornaments. Medical examination confirmed a torn hymen and post-traumatic stress disorder. Investigation revealed that a strikingly similar gang rape of a photojournalist had occurred at the same Shakti Mills on 22 August 2013, for which certain accused were already arrested. The description and modus operandi matched, and a juvenile-in-conflict-with-law (Akash) disclosed the names of the other accused. Consequently, the investigation of this case was also handed over to the DCB CID Crime Branch Unit III on 5 September 2013, and a test identification parade was held for the appellant and other accused. The appeal was heard, reserved on 14 October 2021, and judgment pronounced on 25 November 2021. The provided text, however, cuts off during the description of the test identification parade and does not include the court's analysis, the arguments presented, the legal issues considered, the ratio decidendi, or the final disposition of the appeal.
Issue of Consideration
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 210 OF 2015
