MANIK DAS BAISHNAV Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal, under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence, dated 11-2-2005, passed by learned Sessions Judge, South Tripura, Udaipur, in Case No. ST.55(ST/S) of 2004.

(2.) Prosecution case, in short, is that the accused appellant, Manik Das Baishnav and the victim. Smt. Basanti Das, were residents of village Dolbari under P.S. Sabroom, District-South Tripura. The accused, Manik, being friend of Rabindra Das, elder brother of Basanti, used to frequently visit her house, as a neighbour and with the promise of marring her, the accused developed love affairs with her and with the allurement of such marriage in future the accused enjoyed sex with her at different places and different point of time. The victim, Basanti, believed the accused, on good faith and surrendered her person to the accused for enjoyment of sex and that continued for a few years. The accused even took her to a hotel at Udaipur and introduced the victim as his wife and he put vermillion on her forehead and also made her to wear coanch bangles and, thereafter, they resided in the hotel for one night and the accused enjoyed sex with her for the whole night. He wrote his name in the hotel register as 'Ratan Das' but the victim wrote his name as Basanti Das as wife of the accused. On the following morning they returned and the accused asked her to wipe out vermillion from the forehead and also to unwear the coanch bangles stating that he will marry her after arranging marriage of his sisters. But after marriage of his sisters was over the accused started avoiding her and ultimately refused to marry her. There was a village meeting at the instance of the victim and her father but the issue was not settled. Thereafter, the victim, Basanti Das, lodged FIR and police on investigation submitted charge-sheet against the accused for commission of offence punishable under Sections 493 and 376 of IPC.

(3.) In course of trial learned Sessions Judge framed charges against the accused for commission of offence punishable under Sections 376(1) and 493 of IPC to which the accused appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.