PRASANTA SINGH @ BHULU Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal found its emergence after it was preferred by appellant against the judgment and order of conviction passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, 7th Court, Alipore, South 24 Parganas, in Sessions Trial No. 5(6) of 2013, arising out of Sessions Case No. 17(5) of 2013, convicting the appellant under Section 376(2)(f)/ 506 I.P.C., and thereby sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten (10) years and to pay fine of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with default stipulation to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one year for commission of offence under Section 376(2)(f) and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two (2) years for offence under Section 506 I.P.C.

(2.) The appellant challenged the order of conviction and sentnece contending the same to have been erroneously recorded merely on assumption, surmises and conjectures in a case where there was admittedly no medical evidence indicative of commissioning rape upon the injured victim. Further contention of the appellant is that the evidence was infested with several contradictions and full of improbabilities, upon visualization of which accused/appellant ought to have been favoured with benefit of doubt. According to appellant there could not be any straight jacket formula to believe the sole testimony of the victim/prosecutrix as a gospel truth even in absence of clinching medical evidence, supportive of rape.

(3.) The best possible witness like the younger brother of victim, who at the relevant point of time was present in the house of victim, when victim was called upon by accused to his house, but he could not be examined in order to unveil the prosecution story rendering the prosecution case to be highly suspicious.