MINTU BANIK Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction dated 8th June, 2006 and sentence dated 9th June, 2006 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge, Fast Track 2nd Court Alipurduar, Jalpaiguri in Session Trial No. 11/2006 : Session Case No. 173/2005, thereby convicting the accused appellant Mintu Banik for committing an offence under Section 376 (2) (f) of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/-, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for three years. In the event of realisation of fine, 90 per cent of the same was directed to be paid to the victim girl in terms of Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This is a case where the appellant father was convicted for ravishing his own minor daughter.

(2.) The mother of the victim girl and wife of the appellant lodged the First Information Report on 26th August, 2005 at about 13.35 hours alleging that her 10 years old daughter was raped by the appellant on 13th August, 2005 at about 8 hours. She alleged that in the 11 years of her marriage she gave birth to three daughters, the victim being the eldest one aged about 10 years. She stated that her husband was engaged in electrical job. Due to poverty she had to take up a job in a nursing home. She used to go out in the early morning and return home at about 8 P.M. The victim used to go to school at 7 A.M and return home at 9 A.M or 10 A.M. At that time the appellant used to close windows of the room and when their daughter entered he used to shut the door and used to rape her on the mat kept on the floor by threatening her with dire consequences with a sharp chopper kept by his side. He had been doing so for the last two months. On 13th August, 2005 when the informant became ill and went to her maternal home accompanied by the victim, there at about 8 A.M she sent the victim to her husband to bring some money for purchase of medicines. The victim first went to her aunt PW 3. Thereafter, as soon as victim entered into the appellant's room, he forcibly brought her below the 'chowki' and began to rape her. He threatened her not to disclose the matter or else he would kill her with a chopper. But, the victim disclosed the matter to her eldest aunt PW 3, who in turn, intimated the same to the mother PW Since then the de facto complainant kept her daughter with her eldest uncle PW 8 and informed the matter to all her family members. At this the appellant became angry and came to beat her. Lastly on 22nd August, 2005 at about 1.30 A.M the appellant asked PW 2 to call the victim. When she refused, the appellant attacked her with fists and blows and threatened to cut her down with a chopper. Being unable to bear such intolerable crimes, PW 2 decided to file the First Information Report. But, due to illness, she was late in informing the police.

(3.) After registration of the First Information Report, investigation started. The accused appellant was arrested. The victim was medically examined by a doctor (PW 9). Her statement under Section 164 of the Code was also recorded by a learned Magistrate (PW 17). A charge-sheet was submitted and finally a charge was framed against the appellant on 8th March, 2006 for commission of an offence under Section 376 (2) (f) of the Penal Code.