JUDGMENT:- Heard learned Advocate Mr. A. K. Bhangde for the appellant and learned APP Mr. S. B. Ahirkar for the respondent-State. 2. Perused the record. 3. This is an appeal against conviction for offence under Sections 376 and 325 of Indian Penal Code, sentencing the appellant-accused to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for seven years with a fine of Rs.500-00, in lieu whereof, further Rigorous Imprisonment for six months for the former offence, and Rigorous Imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.300-00, on failure to pay, Rigorous Imprisonment for three months for the latter offence. 4. The charge on accused is that on 26th July, 2006 at about 1.45 p.m., at Ultratech Cement Factory, Awarpur, the appellant accused:- [a] raped victim, and was alleged to have committed an offence punishable under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code; [b] voluntarily caused grievous hurt to the mouth of said victim by dealing a fist blow, which resulted in falling of her teeth, and, thus, was alleged to have committed an offence punishable under . Section 325 of Indian Penal Code, and [c] the accused-appellant not being a person from the community of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe and being in a position to dominate the Will of said victim, since she was a member of Scheduled Caste, exploited her sexually against her will and consent, and was alleged to have committed an offence punishable under Section 3 (1)(xii) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 5. Prosecution has examined in all eight witnesses. These are classified as follows:- Sr. No. Name and Prosecution Witness No. Nature of evidence led. 1. Victim [PW -1 ] Eye-witness & Victim-complainant. 2. Sunilkumar Chintaman Dahikar [PW-2]. Panch Witness on Spot Panchanama. 3. Dharmendra Arjun Tonge [PW-3]. Eye-witness who tried to chase and catch the accused. 4. Shrikant Yashwant Dhivare [PW-4]. Investigating Officer. [Dy.S.P.] 5. Gulabrao Parshuram Wagh [PW-5]. Police Personnel who recorded report. 6. Dr. Sau. Asawari Vijay Deotale [PW -6]. Medical evidence. 7. Dr. Sandip R. Pipre [PW-7]. Dental Surgeon examined to prove injury to teeth. 8. Dayaghan Somaji Kosankar [PW 8]. Investigating Officer. [PSI]. 6. PW-1 victim, who is an eyewitness, deposed as to the incident as follows:- "1. ..........................................On the day of incident at about 7 a.m. I had gone for labour work in L & T factory at Nandafata along with Nanebai, Deobatti and Lalita. Dental Surgeon examined to prove injury to teeth. 8. Dayaghan Somaji Kosankar [PW 8]. Investigating Officer. [PSI]. 6. PW-1 victim, who is an eyewitness, deposed as to the incident as follows:- "1. ..........................................On the day of incident at about 7 a.m. I had gone for labour work in L & T factory at Nandafata along with Nanebai, Deobatti and Lalita. At about 12.30- p.m., there was recess for lunch. Myself, Deobattibai, Nanebai and Lalita went to take food and after taking lunch we took rest for sometime. In the premises of factory there is a room of cement bags known as cement mill. I went for urinal. I used to go there always and so, as usual on the day of incident also I had gone in that cement mill. When I sat for passing urine, meantime the accused who is sitting before the court had dragged me. Accused was also doing in the same factory. Accused had dragged me and committed rape on me. He removed my nicker I raised alarm and made hue and cry. Then the accused beat me with fist on my mouth. Therefore, my three lower jaw teeth had fallen. He had put a cloth in my mouth and gagged my mouth. Then he removed his clothes and then he had forcible sexual intercourse with me. At the time of the said incident, due to alarm the persons who were present nearby, gathered on the spot and, therefore, the accused ran away from there." "2. After gaining consciousness I came at police station Gadchandur and lodged a report. Report is shown to me. It bears my thumb impression. (Contents of report are read over to the witness in court) I am illiterate. I cannot read and write. Report which is now read over to me, its contents are true and correct. It is at EX.31. Printed F.I.R., bears my thumb impression. It is at Ex.32. Police had sent me to General Hospital, Chandrapur for medical check up. Lady doctor had examined me. Police had seized the clothes which were worn by me at the time of incident. I wore pink coloured saree, green blouse and green petticoat. I can identify my clothes if they are shown to me. I can also identify my underwear if shown to me. Police had seized my plastic chappals from the spot. Lady doctor had examined me. Police had seized the clothes which were worn by me at the time of incident. I wore pink coloured saree, green blouse and green petticoat. I can identify my clothes if they are shown to me. I can also identify my underwear if shown to me. Police had seized my plastic chappals from the spot. Pink coloured saree is the same saree which is Article-A; green coloured petticoat and blouse are the same. They are articles-B and C. Underwear was seized by the police from the spot where it was thrown. Green coloured nicker shown to me is the same. It is Article-D. [Quoted from page nos. 62 and 63 of the Appeal Paperbook]. 7. The prosecutrix was examined by PW-6 . Dr. [Sau.] Asawari V. Deotale, who has issued the Certificates of injury/ Examination, namely Exhs.50 and 53. 8. The evidence of PW -6 - Dr. Asawari is totally silent on the point of sexual assault. 9. The contents of First Information Report disclose the version of the complainant as follows:- "......................................................... Thereafter, when we were taking rest there only, at about 01-450' clock in the afternoon, I went to one room in the Cement Mill for urination and when I was about to sit for urination, a man named Hanumantu Kuchankar came there from back side. He caught me in the darkness of the said room and felled me down. At that time, I started raising shouts as "Dhava", "Dhava" (Rush to save me) Hanumantu Kuchankar removed my underwear and threw it outside. Then he removed his full-pant and underwear, caught my legs and layon my breast (person) and after inserting his penis into my vagina, he started committing forcible sexual intercourse. I tried to resist and push him. On it, he gave fist blow on my mouth and put cotton waste in my mouth. As a result of it, my lower three teeth fell down. In the meanwhile, he committed complete sexual intercourse with me. At the same time, three to four persons working in the Cement Mill came there. On seeing them, Hanumantu Kuchankar ran away there from. The persons came there took out the cotton waste from my mouth..........................." [Quoted from page nos. 68 and 69 of the Appeal Paperbook]. 10. In the meanwhile, he committed complete sexual intercourse with me. At the same time, three to four persons working in the Cement Mill came there. On seeing them, Hanumantu Kuchankar ran away there from. The persons came there took out the cotton waste from my mouth..........................." [Quoted from page nos. 68 and 69 of the Appeal Paperbook]. 10. PW -1 - had claimed in First Information Report that the accused has done the act of complete sexual intercourse. PW -1 has not given one and all details narrated by her in First Information Report. 11. PW -1 - is a married woman. She is used to, and is experienced in sexual acts. She did not face sexual act first time when the accused raped her. When she has described in First Information Report that the accused did act of complete sexual intercourse, it includes ordinarily the ejaculation and passing of semen. 12. The report of Chemical Analyser in unambiguous terms states total negativity on the point of traces of semen and spermatozoa in vaginal swab. 13. This evidence of Chemical Analyser, when matched with [a] First Information Report, and [b] deposition ofPW1 and that of other witnesses, who claim to have chased, falsifies the testimony of PW -1. 14. PW -1 - has narrated that even the accused had removed his pant. She claims that she c1amoured. She also claims that accused committed complete sexual intercourse. Yet, it is alleged by other witnesses that they could not chase and catch the accused. The whole story takes the shape of 'cock and bull. It appears that truth is suppressed and lie is pushed ahead. 15. Medical evidence suggests that breaking of teeth is possible by falling. Moreover, a fist blow or blows on mouth or tooth resulting in fracture and damage to bones cannot occur without leaving any injury on the fist with which hammer blow was given on the tooth of the victim, which were allegedly broken due to said fist blow. 16. In these premises, in so far as injury by way of breaking of teeth is concerned, it is not proved that it was caused by the accused. A question also arises as to whether and why the version of the prosecutrix should be believed limited to grievous hurt when on facts, it is emerging that PW -1 did not give truthful account of facts. 17. A question also arises as to whether and why the version of the prosecutrix should be believed limited to grievous hurt when on facts, it is emerging that PW -1 did not give truthful account of facts. 17. In these premises, the entire story of physical as well as sexual assault on the prosecutrix is not at all proved. The story brought forward by the prosecution appears fully improbable. The defence suggested by the accused is strongly probable that there was some financial transaction between the accused and the victim. The accused did not satisfy the demand of the prosecutrix. She might have fallen down, or even that there was a quarrel where the prosecutrix fell and suffered the injury to her teeth, however, she has tried to paint a story of rape on her and brought her credibility in total unworthiness. 18. In the result, appeal succeeds. Appeal is allowed. Judgment and order of conviction and sentence for offence under Section 376 as well as 325 of Indian Penal Code is hereby set aside. Appellant be set at liberty. Appeal allowed.