FAGU MONDAL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by appellant Fagu Mondal challenging the judgment dated

(2.) 12.2010 (hereinafter called as impugned judgment) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track, 2nd Court, Malda in Sessions Case No. 187 of 2005 convicting the appellant under Sections 376 (2) (g)/379/324/323 of the Indian Penal Code (in short I.P.C.). in consequence of such conviction order was passed on 04.12.2010 sentencing the appellant to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs.2,000/ - in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 6 months for the offence punishable under Section 376 (2) (g), I.P.C. and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs.1,000/ - in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 3 months for the offence punishable under Section 379, I.P.C. and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs.500/ - in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 3 months for the offence punishable under Section 324, I.P.C. and to suffer rigorous imprisonment of 6 months and fine of Rs.100/ - in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month for the offence punishable under Section 323, I.P.C. with order to run the sentences simultaneously. 2 The case under trial in the trial Court was initiated against the appellant and one Mohan Mondal as accused persons. Said Mohan Mondal absconded in course of trial and in the trial Court his case was filed for the present. Splitting up his case the case was fully tried against the appellant and the impugned judgment was delivered. In the trial Court the case of accused Mohan Mondal still remains pending. 2. It is a case of gang -rape of a married woman aged about 35 years after assaulting her administering country liquor to her forcibly and snatching her gold earrings and nose -pin by two accused persons including the appellant on 13.06.2004 in the shop room of the appellant when the victim lady (hereinafter referred as PW 1) became senseless due to such brutal torture on her. After the incidents accused persons left the senseless victim inside a jungle at Kalidighi field. Regaining sense PW 1 returned home and narrated the facts to her husband (PW 15). Then PW 15 took PW 1 to a quack doctor and under his advice took her to Hatimari hospital wherefrom she was referred to Malda Sadar Hospital where she was medically treated as indoor patient for nine days. On the following date of occurrence PW 15 lodged FIR at Gazole P.S. and police investigated the case. PW 15 described himself as a day labour. In FIR he stated that on 13.06.2004 PW 1 went to the field for cutting grass for their cows. Accused persons took her to the shop of the appellant at Kalidighi field and then the occurrence took place. In the night at about 11:00 p.m. PW 1 returned home with bleeding injuries on her ears, nose and private parts and her wearing apparels were soaked with blood. Prosecution examined 15 witnesses to prove the case. Documentary evidence was also adduced during trial and said documents were marked exhibits 1 to 10. Wearing apparels of the PW 1 were collectively marked Mat. exhibit - I.

(3.) Defence of the appellant as accused during trial was that the whole prosecution story was false one and the case was brought by PW 1 in connivance with her husband to squeeze money from accused persons creating pressure upon them. No evidence was adduced by accused.