STATE OF TRIPURA Vs. DILIP GUHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals being CRL.A. No.10 of 2012 [the State of Tripura vs. Sri Dilip Guha] and CRL.A.(J) No.05 of 2013 [Sri Dilip Guha vs. State of Tripura] are consolidated for disposal by a common judgment for the reason that those appeals emerge from the judgment of conviction dated 31.08.2012 and the consequential order of sentence dated 01.09.2012 delivered in case No.S.T.37 (WT/K) of 2010 by the Addl. Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Khowai, as it then was. It is to be noted at the outset that the appeal being CRL.A. No.10 of 2012 has been filed by the State under Section 377(1) of the Cr.P.C. for enhancing the sentence whereas the appeal being CRL.A.(J) No.05 of 2013 has been filed by the convict, hereinafter referred to as the appellant, under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. from the judgment and order of conviction and sentence respectively dated 31.8.2012 and 1.9.2012. For convenience sake, the appellant-state would only be referred to as the State. By the judgment dated 31.08.2012, the appellant has been convicted under Section 376(2) (a) (i) of IPC and 120B of the IPC. Pursuant to the said judgment of conviction dated 31.08.2012, the appellant has been sentenced to suffer 10[ten] years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 10,000/-, with default stipulation for committing the offence punishable under Section 376 (2) (a) (i) of IPC. The appellant has further been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 2[two] years and fine of Rs.5,000/- with default stipulation for committing the offence punishable under Section 120B of the IPC.

(2.) Briefly stated the prosecution's case is that on 28.10.2010, one Amulya Das [PW-1] lodged the written complaint to the Officer-in-Charge, Kalyanpur Police Station revealing that from 26.10.2010 his minor daughter, hereinafter would be referred to as the victim for protecting her identity, was missing while returning from the house of one Yogeshwar Nath Sharma. The minor daughter of the informant used to work as the domestic aide in the house of said Yogeshwar Nath Sharma. But it has been also stated that after completing her job in the house of Yogeshwar Nath Sharma, she came to her own house at 11.30 am. Thereafter, daughter of Surendra Das, namely Minati Das [Rani] kidnapped her from the road. The victim came back to her residence on 27.10.2010 at about 10.30 am. At that time, the victim, in response to query, stated that Minati @ Rani enticed her and had taken her to the quarters of one Dilip Guha [the appellant], the O.C. On the previous evening, his daughter had to take huge quantity of liquor and as consequence, his daughter lost her senses. In that state of condition, his daughter [the victim] was raped throughout the night. In that act, Minati @ Rani aided the appellant.

(3.) Based on the said written ejahar, Kalyanpur P.S. Case No.72/2010 under Sections 366-A and 376 of the IPC was registered and taken up for investigation. On completion of investigation, the police report under Section 173(2) of the Cr.P.C. was filed. As the offence is exclusively triable by the court of Sessions, the police papers were committed to the court of the Addl. Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Khowai, hereinafter referred to as the trial court. The trial court having taken the cognizance framed the charge separately against Minati Das @ Rani and the appellant. For purpose of reference and in order to avoid any confusion, it would be apposite to reproduce the charge as framed separately against two accused persons viz. Minati Das @ Rani and Dilip Guha [the appellant]: Charges as framed against Minati Das @ Rani Firstly, that on 26.10.10 at about 12.00 hrs pursuance to your agreement with Dilip Guha, co-accused of this case, you induced Kumari X, D/o: Sri Amulya Das S/o Lt. Harimohan Das of Kalyanpur, under Kalyanpur P.S for visiting his house to reach at Kamalpur in the residential quarters of Dilip Guha, O.C. of Kamalpur P.S. with a view that said Kumari X be raped by Dilip Guha and thereby you have committed an offence punishable under section 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and within my cognizance. Secondly, that on the aforesaid date and time, pursuance to your agreement with Dilip Guha, co-accused of this case, you induced Kumari X, D/o Sri Amulya Das to accompany you from her house situated at Kalyanpur to Kamalpur in the Govt. Quarters of Dilip Guha, O.C. of Kamalpur P.S. you intend that said Kumari X might be forced or seduced to illicit intercourse by Dilip Guha and thus you have committed an offence punishable under section 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code and within my cognizance. Thirdly, that in the intervening date between 26.10.10 and 27.10.10 at night between 1900 hrs to 0500 hrs on the following day in the Govt. quarters of Kamalpur P.S. which was allotted to Dilip Guha, O.C. of said P.S you abated Dilip Guha in committing offence of rape against X, D/o: Sri Amulya Das of Kalyanpur under Kalyanpur P.S and you were present at the time of said offence in pursuance to your abatement and thus, you have committed an offence of abatement of offence of rape punishable under section 114 of Indian Penal Code read with section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and within my cognizance. And