KARTICK KUNDU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in this criminal revision was convicted by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Hooghly under 8s. 376 and 493 of the Penal Code and sentenced to four years rigorous imprisonment under each of these two charges and the sentences were to run concurrently. The petitioner's appeal was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and the order of his conviction was confirmed, so also the sentence of four years rigorous imprisonment in respect of the charge under Section 493 of the Penal Code. But the appellate court set aside the separate sentence in respect of the charge under Section 376 of the Penal Code. The petitioner has come up in revision against that order of conviction and sentence.

(2.) THE prosecution case is briefly as follows: Raj Mohan Rana, was an inhabitant of village Teghoria within Aramhagh police station in the district of Hooghly. He shifted to his father in. law's house at Dihiaoira where he used to live with his wife Drmila and children including a grown -up daughter Pratima. Eajmohan and his family came down there after the death of his father -in -law Ashutosh Nandy who had a brother Sarat Chandra Nandy and a cousin Kapil Nandy. Sarat's son Biswaratb. lived in the same house. Similarly, Tinkaribala, widow of Kapil also lived in the same house and the accused Kartic was the daughter's son of said Tinkari Bala. The position of the house is important in so far as it is material for the purpose of the case. They lived within the same compound. The house was separated in three blocks but within the same compound although they had boundary walls in each case. The three families used to live side by side. The petitioner Kartick Kundu was related and acquainted with the family of Raj Mohan since his childhood. Raj Mohan's eldest daughter Pratima was acquainted with the petitioner since her childhood. Both the petitioner and the girl Pratima used to play together and in course of time there grew up love and attachment between the two. Petitioner Kartick expressed his intention to marry Pratima in the month of Aswin 1368 B. S. The girl's mother naturally asked accused Kartiok to have the consent of his parents. Upon that Kartick proposed to marry Pratima by registration and he told Urmila, mother of Pratima that his parents would not give consent to such marriage. Then what happened is of some importance for the purpose of this case. In the middle of Asrahayan 1368 B. S. when Urmila had gone to Tagharia, Kartiok informed Pratima that he would be marrying her on the following morning by registration. Then began the journey for registration when Kartick took Pratima to Khanakul Registration office in the early morning. Pratima's father used to work at Midnapore and would occasionally come down to Dihiboica. On the following morning Pratima left her father's house at Dihiboira for Khanakul Registration office along with Kartick. Kartick asked Pratima to wait outside the Registration office. After sometime he brought some stamped paper on which Kartick obtained the thumb impression and signature of Pratima and he signed himself representing that he would marry Pratima by registration. The prosecution case further is that the girl Pratima in good faith put her thumb impression and signature on the paper and she was convinced that marriage was effected by registration. When Kartick returned after sometime from inside the Registration office and told her that marriage hid been registered, both Kartick and Pratima returned home. The prosecution case also is that in the meantime Urmila, mother of Pratima and Pratima's brother were anxious for Pratima's temporary absence from their house. Bat when they returned they learnt that their marriage was effected by registration. Urmila accepted the marriage in good spirit. Friends and neighbours of Kartiok managed to have a village dinner from Kartick and a dinner party was actually arranged to entertain the village people. Then followed co -habitation between Kartick and Pratima. They used to sleep in the same house and share the same bed, as husband and wife. In course of time Pratima conceived and she came to learn only a few months after her conception that there was in fact no marriage at all. The occasion for the discovery of this fraud was a quarrel arising out of Pratima'a demand for ornaments from her husband Kartick. This quarrel was about the end of Sravan 1369 B. S. At that time Kartick denied his marriage with Pratima and wanted to avoid the marriage. It appears that the alleged marriage took place on or about the 1st December, 1961. The birth of a child was in the first week of December 1962. The dates are telling and very relevant.

(3.) THE defence was that Pratima conceived due to her intercoure with some other person and the accused was not responsible for it. The defence further was that Eartick was made a scope goat by the villagers and that when Kartick tried to enclose his land to the east of the house of Urmila by constructing a fencing, there was a quarrel between Kartick and Urmila and Biswanath and they managed to induce the girl Pratima to lodge a false complaint.