SANDIP DAS Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 14.05.2015 and 15.05.2015 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court-cum-Special Court under POCSO Act, Barasat, North 24 Parganas in Special case No. 16/14 arising out of Sessions trial case no. 07(02)2014 convicting the appellant for commission of offence punishable under sections 376(2)(f)(N) of the Indian Penal Code and under sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as 'POCSO Act') and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for six months for commission of the offence punishable under section 376(2)(f)(n) of the Indian Penal Code more and also to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months more for commission of the offence punishable under section 4 of the POCSO Act with a further direction that fine amount, if realized, be paid to the victim children, in equal share. Both the sentences to run concurrently.

(2.) The prosecution case as alleged against the appellant is to the effect that the appellant used to impart computer lesson to the victims who were aged around nine years. The victims used to go to the residence of the appellant on every Sunday between 10.00 A.M. to 11.30 A.M. for such purpose. Taking advantage of the situation, the appellant took the victims separately inside the room and touched their vaginas with his mouth and also rubbed his penis against their vaginas. He also made the victims put his penis into their mouths. This continued for 7-8 months. Finally, on 26.09.2013 the victims disclosed such fact to their parents whereupon mother of one of the victims lodged complaint with the local police station resulting in registration of Barasat Women P.S. Case No. 86 dated 26.09.2013 under section 376(2)(f)(n) of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) In the course of investigation, the victims were medically examined and charge-sheet was filed. Charges were framed under section 376(2)(f)(n) of the Indian Penal Code and under sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. In the course of trial, prosecution examined 13 witnesses and exhibited a number of documents. The defence of the appellant was one of innocence and false implication and he submitted that he has been falsely implicated due political rivalry with P.W.6, uncle of one of the victims, P.W.2. In support of his defence, the appellant examined his mother as D.W.1.