RAJAB ALI @ ANAI Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 16.01.2015 and 17.01.2015 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court, Nadia, Krishnagar in Sessions Trial No. VIII(Nov.).13 arising out of Sessions Case No. 34(9) 13 convicting the appellant for commission of offence punishable under Sections 376/354 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 50,000/-, in default, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for two years for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the sentences are run concurrently.

(2.) The prosecution case as alleged against the appellant is to the effect that on 15.7.2012 at around 10.00 A.M., the victim had gone to his residence to demand money which had been paid to him for securing a job for her son. Taking advantage of such situation, the appellant gagged the victim and raped her forcibly. She returned home and narrated the incident to her husband. Out of fear of public disgrace, they kept quite. Again on 17.8.2012 at around 8 P.M. when her husband had gone to offer Namaz, the appellant came to the residence of the victim and tried to rape her. She cried for help and due to intervention of others, the appellant ran away. On the next day, the victim lodged complaint with Nakashipara Police Station resulting in registration of Nakashipara Police Station Case No. 921 of 2012 dated 18.8.2012 under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. In the course of investigation, the victim was medically examined and charge sheet was filed against the appellant. The case being a sessions triable one was committed to the Court of Sessions and transferred to the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court, Nadia, Krishnagar for trial and disposal. Charges were framed under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 376/511 of the Indian penal Code with regard to the incidents, as aforesaid. The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. In the course of trial, prosecution examined 8 witnesses and exhibited a number of documents. In support of his defence, the appellant examined his son-in-law Kachi Seikh as D.W.1. In conclusion of trial, the trial Judge by the impugned judgment and order dated 16.01.2015 and 17.01.2015 convicted and sentenced the appellant, as aforesaid. Hence, the present appeal.

(3.) Mr. Sanyal, learned Senior Advocate with Mr. Bari and Mr. Dey, learned Advocates appearing for the appellant argued that the narration of the alleged incident by the victim, P.W.1 does not inspire confidence. It is unnatural why the victim and her husband P.W.2 kept quiet about the first incident for more than a month. He further submitted that the second incident which occurred in the house of the victim is most improbable as other inmates of the house were present at the time of occurrence. He submitted that there was enmity over demands of dowry between the appellant who is the father-in-law of one of the sons of the victim (D.W.1) and the family of the victim. Accordingly he was falsely implicated in the instant case. Hence, the appeal ought to be allowed.