NAROTTAM BISWAS Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dtd. 30/7/2013 passed by Learned Additional Sessions Judge, 5th Court Krishnagar, Nadia in Sessions Trial No. XIII(Jan) 2013 arising out of Sessions Case No. 27(1) 2013 convicting the appellant for commission of offence punishable under Sec. 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and also pay a fine of Rs.25,000.00, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one year more and with a further direction that the fine, if realized, be handed over to the victim girl.

(2.) Prosecution case as alleged against the appellant is to the effect that the victim girl (P.W. 7), aged around 7 years, along with her mother (P.W. 1) had been invited to attend the Boubhat ceremony of their neighbour, one Mohonlal Biswas. Around 9 P.M. dancing and other celebrations were going on in connection with the marriage. Victim girl went out to call her friend Papiya to participate in the dance. Taking that advantage of the situation, appellant called her and told her to keep a bag in his house. Victim girl politely agreed. When she entered the room the appellant immediately entered from behind and closed the door. Thereafter, the appellant removed her wearing apparels as well as his trouser. He put his male organ on her vagina but could not penetrate. Thereafter, he inserted his male organ in her mouth. He gave a ten-rupee note to the child. When her mother (P.W. 1) enquired, she narrated the incident to her. On the next day, her mother lodged written complaint at the police station being Tehatta P.S. Case No. 799/2010 dtd. 12/12/2010 under Sec. 376(2)(f) of the IPC against the appellant. Victim girl was medically treated and made statement before the learned Magistrate. Appellant absconded and subsequently was arrested and medically examined by P.W. 13 on 13/10/2012. In conclusion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against the appellant and charge was framed under Sec. 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code. Appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. It was his specific defence that he was impotent and incapable of sexual intercourse. In the course of trial, prosecution examined 15 witnesses and exhibited a number of documents.

(3.) In conclusion of trial, learned trial judge by judgment and order dtd. 30/7/2013 convicted and sentenced the appellant, as aforesaid.