NIRMAL MANDAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present appeal, Nirmal challenges the impugned judgment dated 18th March, 2017 convicting him for the offences punishable under Sections 417/376 IPC and the order on sentence dated 24th March 2017 directing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.30,000/- in default whereof to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the prosecutrix in her cross-examination has admitted that the sexual intercourse was consensual. The prosecutrix further stated that when she called on the mobile phone of the appellant on 7th May 2013 the call was attended by a lady but she has failed to place on record any Call Detail Record to prove the same. She has also failed to place on record the call detail record with respect to the call on 100 number. He further submits that there is a delay of four days in filing the complaint. Statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has also not been recorded. He further submits that the prosecutrix in her statement stated that when her sister called the police on 100 number they came to their house and took everyone to the police station whereas Pinki deposed that police apprehended the appellant from his office. The prosecutrix has alleged that the appellant had beaten her but there is no external injury on the body of the prosecutrix as per the MLC.

(3.) Per contra, Learned APP for the State submits that that the impugned judgment and the order on sentence suffers from no illegality.