Case Note & Summary
The appellants, Narayan s/o Ashok Ragde and Rahim Shah s/o Bashir Shah, were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge-2, Aurangabad in Sessions Case No.409 of 2011 for offences under Sections 376(g), 366(A), and 363 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. They were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years for gang rape, five years for kidnapping, and five years for procuration, with fines. The prosecutrix, a 14-year-old minor, alleged that on 2nd July 2011, while she was alone at her house in Shah Nagar, appellant No.1 Narayan came and insisted she open the door, which she refused. Later, when she went to a grocery shop, both appellants forcibly took her to a brick-kiln, gagged her, threatened to kill her, and committed sexual assault against her will. She escaped and reported the incident to her mother and aunt, leading to an FIR on 3rd July 2011. The trial court relied on the testimony of the prosecutrix (PW-1), her mother (PW-5), her aunt (PW-9), medical evidence (PW-7), and other witnesses. The appellants appealed, arguing that the prosecutrix's testimony was unreliable and that there were contradictions. The High Court examined the evidence and found the prosecutrix's testimony to be natural, credible, and corroborated by medical evidence showing recent sexual intercourse and injuries. The FIR was lodged promptly, and the recovery of clothes at the instance of the appellants further supported the prosecution case. The court held that the minor inconsistencies did not affect the core of the prosecution case. The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence were upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Gang Rape - Minor Victim - Corroboration of Testimony - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 376(g), 366(A), 363, 34 - The prosecutrix, a minor, alleged that she was forcibly taken by the appellants to a brick-kiln and gang-raped. The court held that the testimony of the prosecutrix was credible, natural, and trustworthy, and was corroborated by medical evidence (ruptured hymen, injuries) and circumstantial evidence (prompt FIR, recovery of clothes). The conviction was upheld. (Paras 1-17) B) Criminal Law - Kidnapping - Minor Girl - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 363 - The prosecutrix was taken away from lawful guardianship without consent. The court found that the appellants forcibly took her to a brick-kiln, constituting kidnapping. (Paras 2-5) C) Criminal Law - Procuration of Minor Girl - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 366(A) - The appellants induced the minor prosecutrix to go to a brick-kiln for sexual assault. The court held that the ingredients of procuration were satisfied. (Paras 2-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Sections 376(g), 366(A), and 363 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The judgment and order of conviction dated 21st October 2013 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-2, Aurangabad in Sessions Case No.409 of 2011 is confirmed.
Law Points
- Gang rape
- Minor victim
- Corroboration of testimony
- Medical evidence
- Circumstantial evidence
- Section 376(g) IPC
- Section 366(A) IPC
- Section 363 IPC
- Section 34 IPC
