JUDGMENT : Sadhana S. Jadhav, J. Heard the learned Counsel appointed for the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 602/1994 and learned Counsel for the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 628/1994 and the learned APP for State. 2. The Criminal Appeal No. 602/1994 is filed by the original Accused No. 2 in Sessions Case No. 67/1990 wherein the original accused No. 2 is convicted for an offence punishable under Section 107 read with Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to suffer R.I. for 4 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- I. d. to suffer R.I. for one month. Hence, this Appeal. 3. The Criminal Appeal No. 628/1994 is filed by original accused No. 1 who is convicted for an offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to suffer R.I. for 7 years and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/- I. d. to suffer R.I. for 2 months in Sessions Case No. 67 of 1990 vide Judgment and Order dated 25/10/1994 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Malegaon. 4. Such of the facts necessary for the decision of this appeals are as follows : (i) One Mrs. X is wife of Nandu Wagh and the daughter of Eknath Sonar, resident of Dabhadi. That Mrs. X used to fall sick intermittently. Her husband had formed an opinion that she is a victim of witchcraft. That she is being seized with supernatural power and hence, her husband informed her mother about the same. (ii) The mother of Mrs. X made an enquiry in the village. At that time, she was informed by one Surekhabai that her elder brother-in-law i.e. Shantaram who is resident of Ajmer Saundane would heal such cases. With great hopes, the mother of Mrs. X had taken her daughter to village Ajmer Saundane at about 5 p.m. (iii) They went to the house of the accused No. 1 Shantaram Bhagat. He was not at home. The family members of Shantaram had offered them meals and tea. At about 10 p.m. Shantaram returned to the house. They went to Devghar. At that time, Mrs. X was suffering from some agony. Initially Shantaram had requested the parents and husband of Mrs. X to leave her in his company and that they could stay in his house. However, Mrs. X denied the same offer. Mrs. At about 10 p.m. Shantaram returned to the house. They went to Devghar. At that time, Mrs. X was suffering from some agony. Initially Shantaram had requested the parents and husband of Mrs. X to leave her in his company and that they could stay in his house. However, Mrs. X denied the same offer. Mrs. X had been to devghar alongwith her parents and husband. (iv) In the middle of the intervening night of 24th and 25th Mrs. X was suffering from pain and agony. Seeing her condition, the accused No. 2 i.e. the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 602 of 1994 woke up Shantaram and informed him about the same. That Shantaram had pulled Mrs. X inside the room and the door was closed. (v) The prosecution has further alleged that the accused No. 2 was made to stand outside the room of devghar. According to the prosecution, he was standing guard. (vi) That in the closed room, the accused No. 1 had denuded Mrs. X of her clothes on the ground that he was to remove evil spirit from her body. He had molested her under the garb of curing her. That he had ravished her against her wish. Thereafter, he had not stopped, but had dragged her to a small temple nearby. It is alleged that she was ravished near the temple. Then she was brought to devghar from the rear door. (vii) Her parents and husband continued to sit in devghar. Upon opening the door, Mrs. X rushed towards her mother. She was in a bad state of affairs. She appeared to be disrobed. She immediately informed her mother that Bhagat had committed rape on her. (viii) The parents of the victim had shouted for help. Being night time nobody was there. At that time, nobody was there being night. At night they stayed at the house of an old lady i.e. P.W. 6. Thereafter they approached Satana Police Station and lodged the complaint. (ix) The report was lodged by the victim. On the basis of the said report, Crime No. 56 of 1990 was registered against both the accused for offence punishable under Section 376 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code at Satana Police Station. (x) After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed on 25/8/1990. (ix) The report was lodged by the victim. On the basis of the said report, Crime No. 56 of 1990 was registered against both the accused for offence punishable under Section 376 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code at Satana Police Station. (x) After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed on 25/8/1990. Case was committed to the Court of Sessions and registered as Sessions Case No. 67 of 1990. The prosecution examined 11 witnesses to bring home the guilt of the accused. 5. P.W. 1 is the victim Mrs. X. She has deposed before the Court in consonance with her first information report, which is marked as Exh. 22. She has deposed before the Court that in the relevant night when she started feeling uneasy, said Pujari i.e. accused No. 2 woke up the accused No. 1. Soon thereafter, the accused No. 1 had pulled her inside and taken her in the room. He latched the door from inside. That he had made accused No. 2 stand outside the door. She has narrated her trauma in detail. She has deposed before the Court that at the time of committing rape, the accused No. 1 had trusted newspaper in her mouth. That she had been denuded of her clothes. She has further deposed that there were 3 to 4 doors to the said room. She has also deposed that soon after the incident, she had told the incident to her mother and her husband. She has identified both the accused before the Court. 6. In the cross-examination, the evidence recorded in the examination-in-chief has been fortified. She has categorically stated in the cross-examination that whenever she used to feel uneasy, she was made to believe by the people that some spirit had entered into her body. She was suffering from this state of mind prior to her marriage. She used to suffer from such pain mainly on the 'full moon day' and 'no moon day'. From the tenor of the cross-examination for the accused No. 1, it prima facie appears that the main defence of the accused No. 1 is that he is not a quack/Bhagat, but he is vaidya who gives herbal medicine. However, this aspect has not been remotely admitted in the cross-examination by P.W. 1. From the tenor of the cross-examination for the accused No. 1, it prima facie appears that the main defence of the accused No. 1 is that he is not a quack/Bhagat, but he is vaidya who gives herbal medicine. However, this aspect has not been remotely admitted in the cross-examination by P.W. 1. She has admitted in the cross-examination as follows : "When Shantaram arrived at that time we did not tell anything to him. My parents and my husband told accused no.1 that the daughter and wife is suffering from something and he should lookafter her." 7. She has further deposed that the house where devghar is situated is divided into two parts. That when she was pulled inside by the accused no. 1, she was overpowered by some supernatural force for about 5 to 10 minutes. She was conscious and could understand pain which she was suffering. There was no light in the room where rape was committed. 8. It is pertinent to note that in the cross-examination she has stated that the accused No. 1 had put a newspaper bundle of 'Gavkari' into the mouth of the victim and that the accused No. 1 had removed the said bundle when she came out. She had narrated the agony which she had gone through at the time of commission of rape. 9. In the cross-examination for accused No. 2, it is elicited that Shantaram had come to devghar at about 10 p.m. The accused No. 2 had come to devghar after sometime. Devghar was shown by mother of Shantaram. After the incident, the victim had learnt that the accused No. 2 is pujari. She could not give the source of the information. It is further elicited and admitted in the cross examination that pujari had gone to his house. Accused No. 2 himself told that he is going to call the accused No. 1. 10. The accused have failed to make any dent in the sterling testimony of P.W.1. The testimony not only appears to be truthful to inspire the confidence of the Court by virtue of truthfulness of the said testimony. 11. P.W. 2 happens to be the mother of the unfortunate victim P.W. 1. She has corroborated the narration of the incident deposed by the P.W. 1. The testimony not only appears to be truthful to inspire the confidence of the Court by virtue of truthfulness of the said testimony. 11. P.W. 2 happens to be the mother of the unfortunate victim P.W. 1. She has corroborated the narration of the incident deposed by the P.W. 1. She has deposed before the Court that one pujari was present in the devghar when her daughter started feeling giddiness. Pujari went to wake up the accused No. 1. He had brought the said Bhagat in devghar. At that time, the accused No. 1 had taken P.W. 1 in the rear portion of the room by pulling her hair. At that time, P.W. 1 had started shouting. P.W. 2 alongwith her husband and son-in-law were sitting in the front room. Upon hearing the cries of the victim, they had attempted to peep. However, the accused No. 2 had informed them that the accused No. 1 is removing the ghost. All these continued upto 2 a.m.. After 2 a.m. her daughter came out shouting. She was wearing only petticoat and blouse. Her clothes were in shattered condition. Soon thereafter, helpless parents and daughter came out of devghar and shouted for help. But nobody helped them. One old lady had taken them to her house and helped them. They stayed at her house in the night and at about 7.30 a.m. they came to bus stand and had left for Satana. 12. It is pertinent to know that it is elicited in the cross-examination as following : "Prior to taking of meal the accused No. 1 met us in Dev Ghar. He told us to go and take the meal. He had also asked us to keep the said girl with him. However, my daughter refused to stay there. She came along with us." This would show the intention of the accused no. 1 at the threshold. 13. It is further elicited in the cross-examination that the front door of devghar was open. During the period of four hours, they did not call anybody. That they had raised cries only after they had seen their daughter outside. 14 The tenor of cross-examination would show that the defence of the accused No. 1 was that one Dawal Batalu had instructed the complainant to lodge the report since he was on cross terms with accused No. 1. 15. That they had raised cries only after they had seen their daughter outside. 14 The tenor of cross-examination would show that the defence of the accused No. 1 was that one Dawal Batalu had instructed the complainant to lodge the report since he was on cross terms with accused No. 1. 15. In the cross-examination for the accused No. 2, P.W. 2 has admitted that nobody had told them that the accused No. 2 is pujari and that they had guessed it themselves. It is further admitted that Dhawal had told the name of the accused No. 2 in the police station. 16. P.W. 3 Suresh Shewale happens to be the panch for the spot panchanama. He has given the description of the scene of offence. He has stated that there was a wada behind the said room and there was a cot, broken pieces of bangles of green colours. One bindi was found on the spot which was seized. They had been to temple where the alleged incident had occurred on second occasion. The said temple is of Ayamauli. He has proved the scene of offence panchanama and it is marked at Exh. 25. P.W. 3 has admitted that external proceedings were initiated against him by S.D.M. Kalwan. That he does not have licence for hotel at Satana. However, said admission is insignificant as far as the present case is concerned. 17. P.W. 4 Jibhau Pawar is the panch for seizure of clothes. The panchanama is marked at Exh. 29. It was suggested in the cross-examination to him that he is habitual panch. However, he has stated that he has acted as panch only twice. 18. P.W. 5 Yashod Nandale is the resident of the same village i.e. Ajmer Saundane. He knew both the accused. He has deposed before the Court that the accused No. 1 Shantaram is a bhagat and that the accused No. 2 also hails from the same village. He has further deposed that on the day of the incident in the morning one Ramsing Fakira Pawar (since deceased) had informed him that two ladies and two gents from Dabhadi were crying near the gate of the village. They had come to Shantaram and said Shantaram committed rape on their daughter. He therefore went to help out the said persons. Upon enquiry, the mother of the victim had informed that they had come to Shantaram. They had come to Shantaram and said Shantaram committed rape on their daughter. He therefore went to help out the said persons. Upon enquiry, the mother of the victim had informed that they had come to Shantaram. That he had confined her in a room and committed rape upon her. He had noticed that her wearing clothes were shattered. In the cross-examination the advocate for the defence has made a frail attempt to bring about the omissions and contradictions. However, immaterial omissions and contradiction do not have any bearing on the case. He has admitted in the cross-examination that at the time of incident, accused No. 1 Shantaram was working as recovery clerk in Gram Panchayat and tax recovery work was with him. This makes it further clear that at the time of incident original accused No.1 was a public servant. 19. P.W. 6 Kasubai happens to be the lady to whom the incident was disclosed at the first instance. However, she resiled from her earlier statement and hence, has been declared hostile by the prosecution. 20. Similarly, P.W. 7 Chandrabhaga Pawar also hails from the same village. She has also resiled from her earlier statement and has been declared hostile by the prosecution. 21. Similarly, P.W. 8 Balkrushana Shinde has deposed before the Court that at the relevant date, he had heard shouts from the lane. There was crowd in the lane. The crowd was infront of the house of Shantaram. Shantaram and two ladies were there. He had given water to them. But had not enquired with them. The witness has been declared hostile by the prosecution. However, his examination-in-chief would indicate that indeed, victim had raised hue and cry and people had gathered in front of the house of Shantaram. 22. P.W. 9 Dr. Subhash Sidhapure had admitted the victim in the hospital on 25/4/1990 at the instance of the police of Satana Police Station. He had examined the victim and called upon gynecologist Dr. Mrs. Bhacchav. The victim was examined by Dr. Mrs. Bacchav who is gynecologist. She had given a finding on the case papers. It is endorsed on the case papers as follows : "Clinically there is no evidence of recent forceful vaginal intercourse within 24 hours." P.W.9 had issued a certificate to that effect which is marked as Exh. 40. Mrs. Bhacchav. The victim was examined by Dr. Mrs. Bacchav who is gynecologist. She had given a finding on the case papers. It is endorsed on the case papers as follows : "Clinically there is no evidence of recent forceful vaginal intercourse within 24 hours." P.W.9 had issued a certificate to that effect which is marked as Exh. 40. Upon ossification test, it was revealed that the victim was about 18 to 19 years of age. The witness has denied that he had found any sign to indicate that at the relevant time, the victim was passing through her menstruation period. 23. Exh. 40 and Exh. 42 are the medical case papers of the victim. The case papers would indicate that she was discharged from the hospital on 26/4/1990. It is pertinent to note that the said medical case papers are admitted by the accused under Section 294 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Admission of a document would mean admission of the contents of the document. The document at Exh. 42 shows that the victim was taken to the hospital by the police of Satana Police Station i.e. head constable buckle No. 121. In the said medical case papers, the history of the victim is recorded as history of rape on 24/4/1990 at 2 a.m. The case papers further shows that there were injuries on her person and therefore, gynecologist was called. 24. The learned Counsel for the accused No. 1 vehemently submits that the opinion of the gynecologist was that upon clinical examination, there was no evidence of 'forceful' vaginal intercourse. According to the learned Counsel, there was no evidence of recent "forceful" vaginal intercourse. It is not the case of the accused No. 1 that it was by consent. In fact, the defence of the accused No. 1 is that of total denial and according to him, only because he had refused to administer herbal medicine, he had been falsely implicated by P.W. 1 and 2 and her relatives. In such a situation, case papers are admitted. The history narrated by the patient will have to be taken into consideration in the case under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. Hence, sterling testimony of the victim inspires confidence. The corroborative evidence need not be taken into consideration. There is no reason for the victim to falsely implicate the accused No. 1. The history narrated by the patient will have to be taken into consideration in the case under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. Hence, sterling testimony of the victim inspires confidence. The corroborative evidence need not be taken into consideration. There is no reason for the victim to falsely implicate the accused No. 1. It is not the case of the accused No. 1 that the victim and her family was acquainted with the accused No. 1 or that they were on the inimical terms. The very fact that they had gone and searched for accused No.1 would show that he was a person who was popularly known as Bhagat in that area. That he has committed breach of faith of the victim and her parents who was under the bonafide impression that he has healing powers. 25. Sub Section (3) of Section 294 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 reads as under: Section 294 No. formal proof of certain documents 1. . 2. . 3. Where the genuineness of any document is not disputed, such document may be read in evidence in any inquiry trial or other proceeding under this Code without proof of the signature of the person to whom it purports to be signed: Provided that the Court may, in its discretion, require such signature to be proved. 26. Since the case papers were admitted by the accused, Dr. Mrs. Bacchav has not been examined by the prosecution. The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that all that needs to be considered is the opinion of the gynecologist that there was no evidence of forceful sexual intercourse. According to the learned Counsel for the appellant, sub-clause 3 of Section 294 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 would mean that the said endorsement should be accepted by the court without substantive evidence of Dr. Mrs. Bacchav being recorded. However, this is a case under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, where the sole testimony of the prosecutrix can be relied upon. The Court cannot be oblivious of the fact that before doctor also the prosecutrix had given the history of rape. She had given time when she was ravished. It appears that gynecologist was of the opinion that in the absence of any other external injuries or marks, it would not appear to be a case of forceful sexual intercourse. The Court cannot be oblivious of the fact that before doctor also the prosecutrix had given the history of rape. She had given time when she was ravished. It appears that gynecologist was of the opinion that in the absence of any other external injuries or marks, it would not appear to be a case of forceful sexual intercourse. In the present case, according to the victim, she was seized with some unnatural power for a short while. Taking advantage of the said situation, she was ravished by the accused No. 1. 27. There is cogent and convincing evidence of record which would clearly indicate that the accused No. 1 had taken advantage of her illness and had forced himself upon her. It cannot be said that this is a case of passive submission much less any consent. There is evidence to indicate that the prosecutrix had rather raised hue and cry. However, her relatives as well as accused No. 2 had presupposed, and probably rightly so, that the accused No. 1 was treating her and making efforts to drive "spirit" from her and that it must be painful act and therefore, they had not intervened or pushed upon the door. The conduct of the prosecutrix and her relatives soon after the incident would speak volumes for itself. On the basis of the evidence adduced by the prosecutrix, this Court has observed that there was no question of false implication. The prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. There is no inconsistency or improbability in the substantive evidence of witnesses and hence, the conviction recorded against the accused No. 1 deserves to be upheld. 28. The learned Counsel for the original accused No. 2 i.e. appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 602 of 1994 has rightly submitted that as far as the accused No. 2 is concerned, Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code would not be applicable by any stretch of imagination. It is rightly submitted that the victim and her relatives had come to visit the accused no. 1 for seeking remedy for the victim to relieve her from the alleged witchcraft. That as a natural course, he had woke up the accused No. 1 when the victim was passing through the phase. That after taking the victim in the room, the accused No. 1 had taken undue advantage of the situation. 1 for seeking remedy for the victim to relieve her from the alleged witchcraft. That as a natural course, he had woke up the accused No. 1 when the victim was passing through the phase. That after taking the victim in the room, the accused No. 1 had taken undue advantage of the situation. That accused No. 2 has no ideal that the accused No. 1 would behave in such a ghastly manner. It is elicited in the cross-examination for the accused No. 1 that after the door was closed, the victim was raising hue and cry. The relatives as well as the accused No. 2 are of the opinion that whenever person seized with such supernatural power is being treated, the person used to make such hue and cry. They have not even suspected about the act committed by the accused No. 1 within the close door. No knowledge can be attributed to the accused No.2 of the ghastly act of the accused No. 1. That the accused No. 2 was not a member of the family of the accused No. 1. The prosecution witnesses have also stated that nobody had informed them that he is a pujari of that devghar. Since he was in the said room, they had presumed that he is a pujari. His presence can be a chance presence on that unfateful night. 29. Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code reads thus : "107. Abetment of a thing. - A person abets the doing of a thing, who (First) Instigates any person to do that thing; or (Secondly) Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or (Thirdly) Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing. Explanation 1.A person who, by wilful misrepresentation, or by wilful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing. Explanation 1.A person who, by wilful misrepresentation, or by wilful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing. Illustration A, a public officer, is authorised by a warrant from a Court of Justice to apprehend Z. B, knowing that fact and also that C is not Z, wilfully represents to A that C is Z, and thereby intentionally causes A to apprehend C. Here B abets by instigation the apprehension of C. Explanation 2 - Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of an act, does anything in order to facilitate the commission of that act, and thereby facilitate the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act." In order to constitute an offence of abetment, it is incumbent upon the prosecution to establish that it was an intentional aid, intentional facilitation and intentional abetment of a particular act. All these elements are absent as far as the case of accused No. 2 is concerned and therefore, the accused no. 2 deserves to be acquitted of the charge under Section 107 read with Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. Hence, the Criminal Appeal No. 602 of 1994 is allowed. 30. The Court records appreciation for the efforts put by the advocate appointed for the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 602 of 1994. The professional fees are quantified at Rs. 3,000/- to be paid the learned advocate so appointed within 3 months from today. 31. As far as Criminal Appeal No. 628 of 1994 is concerned, after going through the evidence on record and the submissions advanced across the bar, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. The appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 628 of 1994 is concerned, the appellant is granted 6 weeks time to surrender before the Sessions Court at Malegaon. However, the appellant shall cause his appearance before the Sessions Court at Malegaon on or before 22nd December, 2015 and give his permanent address as well as the address where he is residing at present, cell phone number, address and cell number of his surety. The Sessions Court, Malegaon shall issue bailable warrant to the appellant and inform about this judgment and order upon completion of 6 weeks. The Sessions Court, Malegaon shall issue bailable warrant to the appellant and inform about this judgment and order upon completion of 6 weeks. The appellant shall be taken into custody for surviving sentence enforced by the Sessions Court. The learned Sessions Court, Malegaon shall file the compliance report. 32. Hence, following order is passed : Order (i) The Criminal Appeal No. 602 of 1994 is allowed. (ii) The Judgment and Order convicting the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 602 of 1994 under Section 107 read with Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Malegaon dated 25/10/1994 in Sessions Case No. 67 of 1990 is hereby quashed and set aside. (iii) The appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 602 of 1994 is hereby acquitted of all the charges. His bail bond stands cancelled. Fine amount be refunded, if paid. (iv) The Criminal Appeal No. 628 of 1994 is dismissed. (v) The Judgment and Order dated 25/10/1994 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Malegaon in Sessions Case No. 67 of 1990 convicting the accused No. 1/appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 628 of 1994 is hereby confirmed. (vi) The appellant is granted 6 weeks time to surrender before the Sessions Court at Malegaon. However, the appellant shall cause his appearance before the Sessions Court at Malegaon on or before 22nd December, 2015 and give his permanent address as well as the address where he is residing at present, cell phone number, address and cell number of his surety. (vii) The Sessions Court, Malegaon shall issue non-bailable warrant to the appellant and inform about this judgment and order upon completion of 6 weeks. (viii) The appellant shall be taken into custody for serving the rest of the sentence imposed by the Sessions Court. The learned Sessions Court, Malegaon shall file the compliance report. (ix) Office to issue Writ forthwith. 33. Both the appeals are disposed of accordingly.