Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1
CASE NO.:
Appeal (crl.) 876 of 2006
PETITIONER:
SAWAILAL & ORS.
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF RAJASTHAN
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 31/01/2008
BENCH:
P.P. Naolekar & Lokeshwar Singh Panta
JUDGMENT:
JUDGMENT
O R D E R
Seven persons were put to trial under Sections 376 (2)(g) and 342 of the Indian
Penal Code (in short \023IPC\024). The Sessions Court convicted all the accused persons.
Accused No.5 (Modiram alias Moda) and Accused No.6 (Varu alias Varda) were
convicted for the offence under Section 376 (2)(g) IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I.
for a period of 11 years with fine of Rs.200/- each. In case of default of payment of
fine, they were sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year. Accused No.1 (Basantilal),
Accused No.2 (Sawailal), Accused No.3 (Chunnilal), Accused No.4 (Nainsukh) and
Accused No.7 (Kana) were convicted for the offence under Section 376 (2)(g) IPC
and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of 10 years with fine of Rs.200/- each. In
case of default of payment of fine, they were sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year.
Being aggrieved by the order passed by the Sessions Judge, all the accused filed
an appeal before the High Court. During the pendency of the appeal in the High
Court, accused Basantilal, Chunnilal and Nainsukh died and the appeal of the said
accused-appellants stood abated. The High Court by its judgment dated 15th April,
2005 affirmed the judgment passed by the Sessions Judge.
Being aggrieved by the judgment passed by the High Court, the accused-
appellants, Sawailal, Kanihya Lal @ Kana, Modiram @ Moda and Barda have
challenged the impugned judgment by filing this appeal by special leave.
The incident took place on 26.4.1985. The FIR was lodged by PW.3
(Chaturbhuj), uncle of the prosecutrix (PW.5 Mst. Badami). The names of A-5 and
A-6 (before the Sessions Court), and Basantilal (A-1, since deceased) were
mentioned in the FIR lodged by PW.3. PW.5 (Mst. Badami) prosecutrix, identified
all the accused persons in the Court and stated that all accused (A-1 to A-7) forcibly
committed rape on her. The prosecutrix version is fully corroborated by the medical
evidence placed on record. A-2, A-3, A-4 and A-7 were identified by PW.5 in
identification parade conducted by the Magistrate in the jail on 25.5.1985 which was
also corroborated by the dock identification of these accused persons.
We have minutely scrutinized the evidence of PW.5 (Prosecutrix) and do not find
any infirmity therein. Accordingly, we agree with the findings recorded by the
Sessions Court convicting the accused-appellants as well as those of the High Court
upholding the same. The appeal is without any merit and is dismissed accordingly.