BAPAN @ SANDIP CHAKRABORTY Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 12.03.2015 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-III, Krishnanagar, Nadia in Sessions Trial No. VII (February) 2012 arising out of Sessions Case No. 45(1) of 2012 convicting the appellant under Section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code and directing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.50, 000/-, in default, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for two years and further directing that 50% of fine, if recovered, for the offence under Section 376(2)(g) IPC shall be paid as compensation to the victim girl.

(2.) The prosecution case as alleged against the appellant is to the effect that a minor deaf and dumb girl aged about 13 years had gone missing on the fateful day that is on 05.05.2011. Her parents searched for her everywhere but could not trace her out. On further search they found her lying naked in a nearby jute field in unconscious state. She was brought home and water was sprinkled on her face. In presence of her parents and other neighbours the girl by sign language indicated that she had been raped by the appellant and two others, namely, Goutam and Arup. She was taken to Santipur Hospital where she was treated. Her father lodged written complaint resulting in registration of first information report being Santipur, P.S. Case No. 32015 dated 06.05.2011 under Section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant and two other persons. As the co-accused Arup Biswas and Goutam Mondal were found to be juvenile in conflict with law, their cases were separated and the Case was committed to the Court of Sessions so far as the appellant was concerned and transferred to the Court of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. III, Krishnagar, Nadia, for trial and disposal. Charge was framed under Sections 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

(3.) In the course of trial the prosecution examined 15 witnesses and exhibited a number of documents. The defence of the appellant is one of innocence and false implication.