Judgment I.P.Singh, J. 1. All the appellants have been convicted under Section 376 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years. Appellants Kesh Nath Gosain and Chhabi Gond have further been convicted under Sections 342 and 366 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 342 and rigorous imprisonment for five years under Section 366 of the IPC. However, the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. 2. The prosecution case, in short, as per the written report of Ram Narain Ram is that victim girl Parmi Devi was married with the Informant some time ago and while she had gone to attend call of nature on 26-4-1983 at about 4.00 a.m. and when she did not return, search was made and in the evening it was gathered that she was seen along with Dhaneshwar Bind for the same village in the morning and the Informant also came to know that Dhaneshwar Bind, Chhabi Gond and Kesh Nath Gosain, were in the habit of stealing girls and selling them for illegal purpose. The Informant on getting such information went to the house of Chhabi Gond along with his villagers and there a term and condition was fixed to return the girl and for that the Informant paid Rs. 650/- to him but the victim girl was not returned and accordingly this case was registered. In course of investigation the victim girl Parmi was caught along with appellant Bagendu Bind. After completion of the investigation charge-sheet was submitted. Thereafter cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial which concluded with the result as stated above. The appellants pleaded not guilty and stated that they have been falsely implicated in this case. 3. The prosecution examined altogether 10 witnesses of occurrence PW-1 and PW-9.are formal witnesses PW-7 has been tendered and PW-10 has not suppported the case and was declared hostile. The Investigating Officer and the lady doctor have not been examined. Victim lady, lodged FIR, Ext. 1. It has been alleged that accused were abducting girls and selling them for immoral purposes. However, no evidence has been put forth to show that there was any deal with any person to sell her. On the other hand her husband PW-3 had alleged that on . Victim lady, lodged FIR, Ext. 1. It has been alleged that accused were abducting girls and selling them for immoral purposes. However, no evidence has been put forth to show that there was any deal with any person to sell her. On the other hand her husband PW-3 had alleged that on . getting information about his wife he contacted appellant Chhabi Gond who demanded a sum of Rs. 650/- for return of the victim lady. But, even on payment of the sum so demanded she was not returned and the money was kept by the appellant. PW-8, father of the victim lady had deposed that she was married to PW-3 some 15/16 years back and she had not visited his place since last five years. PW-2 has stated that when she PW-5 did not return after attending the call of nature on that day of the occurrence, he had seen appellant Chhabi, Kesh Nath Gosain and Dhanesh (Since dead) taking away the lady. On enquiry by PW-4 Dhaneshwar told him that he was taking his wife to a doctor for her treatment. On getting this information PW-3 went to the appellants who demanded a sum of Rs. 650/- in presence of PWs-1 and 10. The amount was paid to appellant Chhabi but the promise was not fulfilled. Thereafter he learnt that the victim lady was living with appellant Bagendu Bind and later she was recovered along with appellant and they were handed over to the Police. She narrated the whole story in the Police Station PW-3, Informant has also corroborated the above statement and also stated that he lodged FIR. He has specifically stated that he lodged FIR. He has specifically stated that her wife PW-5 told him that rape was committed over her by the accused Dwarika since dead. On his enquiry Dhaneshwar stated that he was going with his wife for her treatment. He has also stated that after about a month the victim was caught along with Bagendu Bind. This fact has also been supported by PW-6. The victim lady PW-5 in her statement had stated that while she went to ease herself, appellant Dhaneswar Bind along with appellant Chhabi Gond and Kesh Nath caught hold of her and they forcibly took her to village Ushari. However, in the way, PW-6 saw them. This fact has also been supported by PW-6. The victim lady PW-5 in her statement had stated that while she went to ease herself, appellant Dhaneswar Bind along with appellant Chhabi Gond and Kesh Nath caught hold of her and they forcibly took her to village Ushari. However, in the way, PW-6 saw them. In village Ushari she was confined in the house of appellant Chhabi Gond for 10/15 days and during this period she was raped by the appellants for all that days and later on she was taken to village Lchale. She was kept confined in the house her and obtained her LTI on a blank paper on threat. She further stated that from there she was again taken to village Sarwanpur and was kept in the house of Dukhanti and was raped there also by the appellants. Thereafter while appellant Bagendu Bind was taking her to Badhar in the south of village Sarwanpur, they were caught by her husband and Ors. She has also stated that he appellants took her ornaments. The Trial Court has held appellant guilty on solitary evidence of the victim lady PW-5. The other witnesses have corroborated the story in part. The Trial Court has not considered the sub-mission of the defence that non-examination of lady doctor and Investigating Officer has vitiated the case of the defence observing that in such cases where a lady is accustomed to sexual act examination of doctor is not important and also examination of Investigating Officer was not very relevant. However, there are some important points which appear to have been overlooked by the Court below while appreciating the evidence of viction PW-5. From the evidence of PW-5 it appears that the victim claimed to have been raped continuously for about a month by a number of persons. According to her, one of the appellants used to catch her legs and the other used to indulge in the act which seems to be a bit unnatural. According to her, she has been raped for so many days and time, she developed swelling in her private part. She was also produced before the lady doctor who examined her but the lady doctor has not been examined to corroborate her version. While she was in the house of Chhabi she was raped by him while his wife was also in the house. She was also produced before the lady doctor who examined her but the lady doctor has not been examined to corroborate her version. While she was in the house of Chhabi she was raped by him while his wife was also in the house. This also does not look convincing that a wife would allow her husband to commit rape on a lady while she will be present in her house without any.hue and cry. She has also admitted that one of the accused since dead had enmity with her father-in-law. It is also very quoer that though co-accused was inimical with her inlaws family and was not in visiting term with them. But she even though she lent him Rs. 2,000/- for a contract which was given to her by her husband. It also does not stand to reason that a lady who was continuously raped by 3/4 persons for a month will be able to sustain it silently without hue and cry to attract others and there will be no injury on her person. Then again she claimed to have taken to different villages in broad day light but she silently followed them without hue and cry. Lastly she was a grown up lady about 24/25 years old. She in the normal course could have resisted the appellants at least cried to draw the attention of the villagers to save her from the so called clutches of these appellants. But it appears that there is something wrong or the prosecution purposely suppressed the truth. After considering the facts and circumstances and the evidence of the witnesses coupled with the evidence of the victim lady PW-5 it can be said that the prosecution case is not free from suspicion. This benefit shall go to the appellants. In that view of the matter the appellants are given benefit of doubt and accordingly they are acquitted of the charges levelled against them. They are discharged from the liability of their bail bonds. In the result, this appeal is allowed.