GANESH DAS Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is directed against the judgement and order of conviction and sentence dated 24.03.2015 and 25.03.2015 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, II Court, Krishnanager, Nadia, in Sessions Trial No. X(VIII) of 2014 arising out of Sessions Case No. 6(4) of 2014 convicting the appellant for commission of offence punishable under Sec. 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine Rs.5000.00, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months more.

(2.) The prosecution case, as alleged, against the appellant is to the effect that the victim who is aged about eight and half years was returning home from school on 26.03.2014 at about 11.30 AM when the appellant called her to his house. It is alleged that the appellant thereafter removed the wearing apparel of the victim and tried to rape her. As the victim did not return home, the mother of the victim searched and found her at the residence of the appellant. Subsequently on inquiries the victim narrated the incident of her mother. The victim also stated that she did not report the incident earlier as she had been threatened by the appellant and only after suffering agony at the time of urination she decided to narrate the incident to her mother. She was taken to Fulia Health Centre and thereafter to Santipur State General Hospital. On the basis of written complaint of the mother of the victim Santipur Police Station Case No. 158/2014 dated 104.2014 under Sec. 376/511 of the Indian Penal Code read with 4/8 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act was registered. Charge-sheet was filed in conclusion of investigation and charges were framed against the appellant under Sec. 8 of the POCSO Act, 201 The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. In course of trial the prosecution examined as many as ten witnesses. The defence of the appellant is one of the innocent and false implication. He examined one witness in support of his defence. In conclusion of trial the Trial Court by judgement and order dated 25.03.2015 convicted and sentence the appellant, as aforesaid.

(3.) Mr. Kar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that deposition of the victim in Court is at variance to her statement recorded under Sec. 164 of Crimial P.C. Medical evidence does not support the prosecution case of sexual assault. It is also submitted that the prosecution witnesses are interested and no independent witness was examined in the instant case. He accordingly, prayed for acquittal of the case.