JUDGMENT 1. - This is an appeal by the accused-appellant, Hari, who has been convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gangapur City under Section 376 and 307, IPC and sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment on each count and a fine of Rs. 500/- on each count, and in default of payment of fine to further suffer simple imprisonment for a period of six months on each count. 2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 4.6.1976, Mst, Pansuri and Mst. Sakuri had gone from the village to the Jungle to collect cattle-dung. When these two ladies were returning to the village at about 11 a.m., the accused met them and took off the basket of cattle-dung from the head of Mst. Pansuri and told her that now he shall commit sexual intercourse with her. Mst Pansuri caught hold of the hand of Mst Sakuri. The accused is alleged to have slapped Sakuri who left the hand of Mst. Pansuri. Then the accused dragged Mst. Pansuri to a place nearby and made her lie down. Thereafter, the accused lifted the petticoat of Mst. Pansuri and committed sexual intercourse with her against her consent. After having committed the sexual intercourse the accused asked Mst. Pansuri to go away. Thereafter, he told her not to tell the village people about the incident. Thereafter, when Mst. Pansuri was going towards the village the accused followed her and caught hold of her and threw her into a well which was nearby. As Mst. Pansuri knew swimming, she kept on swimming. Then after sometime the village people including her husband came to the well and rescued her. 3. On behalf of the prosecution, PW/1 Pansuri, PW/2 Sakuri, PW/3 Babulal, PW/4 Dhudiya, PW/5 Dr Ratan Chand Totuka PW/6 Dblu, PW/7 Ganpati Ram Yadav and PW/8 Shobh Singh were examined. The accused did not lead any evidence. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge found the accused guilty for the offences under Sections 376 and 307, IPC, and sentenced him as indicated above. 4. On behalf of the accused-appellant, it was contended that no case has been made out again the accused appellant either under Section 376 or under Section 307, IPC. It was contended that the accused is a boy of 18 years; while the prosecutrix Mst. Pansuri is aged 30 years. 4. On behalf of the accused-appellant, it was contended that no case has been made out again the accused appellant either under Section 376 or under Section 307, IPC. It was contended that the accused is a boy of 18 years; while the prosecutrix Mst. Pansuri is aged 30 years. It was also contended that she is the third wife of her husband Babulal PW/3. It was also contended that Mst Pansuri is a mother of number of children, and that it is humanly impossible to conceive that rape could have been committed in the broad day light at 11.00 a. m on, a public passage, especially when Mst. Sakuri was present there. It was also contended that sexual intercourse, if it had at all taken place, was with the active consent of Mst. Pansuri, and when she felt that persons from the village have seen her indulging in such an act, she jumped herself into the well to save herself from the disgrace which would have followed on the information being given in the village by the person who might have seen her. It was also contended that there are no marks on of violence or resistance on the body of Mst. Parsuri. Her bangles were not broken. She was putting on a pair of 'chappals' which she continued to put or during the entire period when the intercourse was committed and that no buttons of the cloth which she was wearing on her breast were broken. It was also contended that there are no marks of violence or injury to her private parts. It was also contended that PW/2 Sakuri does not support the version of Mst. Pansuri. It was also contended that the uncorroborated testimony of Mst. Pansuri should not inspire confidence of this Court, and that looking to all the facts and circumstances of the case the appeal deserves to be accepted. 5. On behalf of the State the learned Public Prosecutor contended that on medical examination there were injuries on the back of Mst. Pansuri which go to establish that sexual intercourse was committed with her, when the was made to lie down on hard surface, and from this an inference should be drawn that an intercourse was committed with her against her wishes and without her consent. Pansuri which go to establish that sexual intercourse was committed with her, when the was made to lie down on hard surface, and from this an inference should be drawn that an intercourse was committed with her against her wishes and without her consent. It was also contended that the accused appellant having not been satisfied himself with the committing of the rape over this lady, dragged her and threw her into a well with a view to kill her. Under these circumstances, it was contended that there is sufficient evidence on record to establish the offences under sections 376 & 307, IPC. It was, therefore, contended that no occasion arises for any interference on the appellate side against the conviction recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. 6. It was further contended that Mst. Pansuri is a reliable witness and conviction on her sole testimony should be sustained. 7. The respective contentions of the learned counsel for the accused- appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor have been considered and the record of the case carefully perused. 8. PW/1 Mst Pansuri has stated that when she along with Mst. Sakuri was returning from the jungle after having collected cattle-dung, the accused met them and told her that now he shall commit sexual intercourse with her. After saying so, the accused took of the basket of cattle-dung from her head and dragged her at the place nearby. She was made to lie down. The accused then lifted her petticoat and committed sexual intercourse with her. She has further stated that after having committed sexual intercourse the accused dragged her to a well nearby and threw her into the well. It has come on the record that the water level of the well was 5' below the level of the ground and that the depth of water was about 15'. It may also come on record that Mst. Pansuri knew swimming and went on swimming till her husband and other persons came there, and they took her out from the well with the help of ropes. 9. PW 2 Sakuri has stated that the accused met them and asked Mst. Pansuri to accompany him. Mst. Pansuri accompanied him to a nearby place. She has further stated that she does not know what happened later on. This witness was declared hostile at the request of the learned Public Prosecutor. 10. 9. PW 2 Sakuri has stated that the accused met them and asked Mst. Pansuri to accompany him. Mst. Pansuri accompanied him to a nearby place. She has further stated that she does not know what happened later on. This witness was declared hostile at the request of the learned Public Prosecutor. 10. PW/3 Babulal states that Dhudiya told him in the village that the accused had committed sexual intercourse. with his wife. On hearing this, Babulal came to the place and found his wife Mst Pansuri in the well. 11. PW/4 Dhudiva states that when he was coming to the village some shepherd boys told him that Mst. Pansuri wife of Babulal has fallen in the well. This witness was also declared hostile at the request of the learned Public Prosecutor. 12. PW/5, Dr. Ratanchand Totuki states that he had medically examined PW/1 Mst. Pansuri. As a result of his examination he found five injuries or her back. All these injuries were bruises. He did not notice any marks of violence on injury on her breast or on her private parts. On the examination of the vagina he was of the opinion that this lady is accustomed to intercourse and that her vagina could easily admit two fingers, and that she has given delivery to children. He was also of the opinion that sexual intercourse has been committed within 24 hours. 13. PW/6 Dablu has stated that when Mst. Pansuri was taken out of the well she did not state what had happened to her and how did she fall into the well. 14. Having given my most anxious consideration to the evidence of record, it appears that the manner and the circumstances in which the rape is alleged to have been committed on Mst Pansuri does not appear to have been established from the record. It is highly improbable that in the broad dad light at about 11.00 a.m. when Mst. Pansuri is accompanied by Mst. Sakuri the accused would straight go to Mst. Pansuri and tell her that he would like to commit sexual intercourse with her. Mst Pansuri is a married woman of grown up age and mother of children. She would have resisted to the best of her capacity. Mst. Sakuri would also have helped her in that resistance. It appears that if the sexual intercourse was committed it was not done against her wishes. Mst Pansuri is a married woman of grown up age and mother of children. She would have resisted to the best of her capacity. Mst. Sakuri would also have helped her in that resistance. It appears that if the sexual intercourse was committed it was not done against her wishes. Thus, it also appears to be highly improbable that after having committed rape the accused would drag her to a well which is 4-5 fields away from the place where the alleged rape was committed, and would throw her into the well. In all, there were no marks of injuries over the person of the lady. It appears that there was absolutely to resistance on her part. Even during the intercourse, the `chappals' which she was putting on were not taken off from the feet. There were no marks of injuries. There is a distance of 4-5 fields from the place where the rape was committed and the well wherein she was thrown. Taking an overall view of the facts and circumstances of the case, I have no hesitation in holding that the prosecution has failed to bring the guilt home to the accused. The accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt. Mst. Pansuri does not appear to be a witness of sterling worth on whose sworn and uncorroborated testimony the conviction could be recorded. 15. For the reasons stated above, the appeal filed by the appellant is hereby allowed. His convictions and sentences under sections 376 and 307, IPC ate hereby set aside. The accused appellant is in judicial custody. He shall be released forthwith if not required in any other case.Appeal allowed. *******