SUREN ORANG Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this revision petition the accused-petitioner has challenged the legality and validity of the judgment and order dated 17-4-1997 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Lakhimpur in Criminal Appeal No. 4(1)/1996 upholding the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lakhimpur in GR Case No. 1134/93 convicting the accused u/S. 493, I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo SI for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to undergo SI for further one month.

(2.) The prosecution case, inter alia, in brief, is that on 7-4-1993 the accused-petitioner came to the house of the complainant in absence of her parents and performed sexual intercourse with her deceitfully inducing her to believe that she is his lawful married wife by putting vermilion on her forehead. She gave her consent for sexual intercourse on the belief that the accused person is her lawful husband as the accused stated that he married her and put vermilion on her forehead. Due to this sexual intercourse followed by other such acts with the accused the complainant became pregnant and at the time of filing the complaint petition on 11-10-2003 she was pregnant for six months. The accused petitioner knowing the pregnancy avoided her company and on being asked, the accused assured that he would take her as his wife but in fact he avoided the complainant. Hence the complaint was filed before the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lakhimpur which was forwarded to the O/C, Bihpuria Police Station for registering a case and for causing necessary investigation. Accordingly a case u/S. 493, I.P.C. was registered against the accused-petitioner and after investigation the police submitted charge-sheet against the petitioner. On process being issued, the accused-petitioner appeared before the learned trial Court and charge u/S. 493, I.P.C. was framed and explained to him to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

(3.) During course of trial prosecution examined as many as seven witnesses including the victim-complainant and the doctor. The defence produced no witness in his support. After completion of the trial the learned trial Court on appreciation of the statement of witnesses and other materials on record convicted the petitioner u/S. 493, I.P.C. and sentenced him in the manner stated above vide judgment and order dated 15-2-1996 passed in GR Case No. 1134/93. Against the said judgment the accused-petitioner filed a Criminal Appeal No. 4(l)/96 in the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Lakhimpur. The learned Sessions Judge independently assessed the evidence and on consideration of the entire facts and circumstances of the case did not find anything to alter the findings arrived at by the learned trial Court and maintained the conviction and sentence vide judgment and order dated 17-4-1997.