MOLOY ROY Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant is the father of the victim who is a 14 year old girl. Prosecution alleges the minor girl used to reside with her father i.e. the appellant. Her mother used to stay in the house of one Susanta Halder where she worked as a nurse. On 30/10/2016, mother of the victim (PW 1), stated her daughter informed her that for the last one year her father had subjected her to penetrative sexual assault on a number of days. Out of fear, shame and trauma she did not inform the incident earlier. Hearing this horrible news PW 1 became outraged and confronted her husband i.e. the appellant. They had a quarrel. Thereafter, she informed her sister-in-law, PW 10 who, in turn, had informed the incident to the brothers of PW 1, that is, PW 6 and PW 8 respectively.

(2.) PW 1 lodged written complaint resulting in registration of Chandannagar Police Station Case No. 266 of 2016 dtd. 30/10/2016 under Sec. 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code. Appellant was arrested and charges were framed under Ss. 376(2)(f)/506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 6 of the POCSO Act. Appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

(3.) In the course of trial prosecution examined ten witnesses. During examination under Sec. 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure appellant denied the incident. Only after entering his defence appellant examined himself as DW 1 and one Manoj Mukherjee as DW 2. During his deposition the appellant made out a new defence case that his wife (PW 1) had an illicit relationship with one Pacha. This resulted in an altercation between them. Hence, he was falsely implicated in the case. DW 2 was examined to probabilise his alibi that the appellant was not in his residence and had gone elsewhere for work. The witness stated appellant used to stay away from his residence in connection with constructing pandels at various places. Vouchers in connection with such construction work were also exhibited.