SRI JAGANNATH DAS Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. NH Rajbarbhuyan, Learned Counsel, for the accused -appellant and Mr. Z. Kamar, learned Public Prosecutor, Assam. This appeal is directed against the order, dated 31.08.2004, passed, in Sessions Case No. 175(N)/2002, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC, Sankardev Nagar, Hojai, has, while acquitting the accused -appellant of the charge, which had been framed against the accused under Section 376(1) IPC, convicted him of an offence under Section 417 IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months and pay fine of Rs. 2000/ -and, in default of payment of fine, suffer rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one month with further direction that the fine shall, if deposited, be given to the victim as compensation.

(2.) AT the time of hearing of this appeal, this Court has noticed that in her evidence, the prosecutrix, who had appeared as PW I, deposed that the accused was a visitor to their house and one day, while she was alone at home, the accused forcibly had sexual intercourse with her and when she told the accused that she would inform the inmates of her house, accused promised that he would marry her and, thereafter, she allowed the accused, for about one year, to have sexual intercourse with her.

(3.) EVEN if the State has not come in appeal against the acquittal of the accused in respect of the charge, which had been framed against him under Section 376(1) IPC, this Court is duty -bound, as a Court exercising revisional jurisdiction, to ensure that the proceedings of a Court, subordinate to this Court, are commenced and concluded in accordance with law. When a Court reaches a finding ignoring a material piece of evidence or reaches a finding by taking into account a fact, which was not admissible in evidence, its finding cannot be sustained and must be treated as perverse.