HAIPARAI JAMATIA Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE judgment and order, dated 14.2.05, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, South Tripura, Udaipur, by which the learned Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant for the offences under Sections 457 and 376 read with Sections 511 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the IPC'), are in challenge in this appeal. THE appellant, who faced trial on the charge of committing offences as indicated above has been convicted and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, suffer simple imprisonment for another two months for his conviction under Section 457 IPC and suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and pay fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, suffer simple imprisonment for another period of six months for his conviction under section 376 read with Section 511 IPC. THE appellant has also been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months for his conviction under Section 302 IPC. Aggrieved by the said convictions and sentences, the convict, as appellant, has come up with this appeal.

(2.) THE prosecution case, in a nutshell, as revealed during the trial, may be stated as follows :-

(3.) CONTROVERTING the said argument, made by the learned defence counsel, the learned Special Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State, has contended that there is sufficient evidence, on record, to show that the appellant committed rape on the victim woman and that he was also involved in the killing of the husband of the informant. The learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, supporting the impugned judgment and order, has submitted that the learned Sessions Judge committed no error by convicting and sentencing the appellant and as such the impugned judgment and order need no interference by this court.