LAWS(GAU)-2013-2-30

SRI RABIN SHARMA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

Decided On February 06, 2013
Sri Rabin Sharma Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ASSAM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. P.C. Dey, leaned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. D. Das, learned APP, Assam. I have also perused the entire materials on record.

(2.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgement of conviction dated 21.2.2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc), Jorhat in Sessions Case No. 56(J-J)/2005, convicting the accused appellant under Section 417 IPC and sentencing him to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default, RI for 6(six) months. The fine was to be paid to the victim girl. The prosecution case started with the lodging of the FIR dated 8.3.2001 with the Pulibor Police Station. The FIR was lodged by the victim girl. As per the FIR, the accused appellant developed an illicit relationship with the victim and as a consequence, she became pregnant. At that point of time, she was 17 years of age. The village 'mel' that was called, failed to yield any result. On receipt of the FIR, Polibor PS case No. 13/2001 was registered under Section 493/376/420/506 IPC. In due course, on conclusion of the investigation, the Police submitted the charge sheet and the trial Court charged the accused appellant under Section 376 IPC. The prosecution examined 7(seven) witnesses and the defence examined none. However, his statement was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. His defence was denial of the charge.

(3.) PW -2 is the mother of the victim who in her deposition, stated that her daughter was about 16-17 years of age. Corroborating the evidence of PW-1, she also stated that the accused appellant was in visiting term in her house and taking advantage of their absence, he committed the offence on the victim. In her cross examination, she admitted that she did not lodge the FIR when the fact of pregnancy became known to her. However, she denied the suggestion made by the defence that the accused did not promise to marry her. PW-3, 4 and 5 are all local people, who in their deposition proved that the victim was pregnant from the accused appellant. They also stated about the failure of the 'mel' that was held for reconciliation.