- (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 17.12.2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. IV, Krishnagar, Nadia in Sessions Trial No. XIII (9) 2007 thereby convicting the appellant Nikhil Sardar for committing offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years with fine of Rs.1,000/-.
(2.) The judgment impugned has been assailed on the following grounds:- (i) that the learned Trial Court failed to apply its judicial mind in the matter of appreciating evidence in its true and proper perspective; (ii) that the learned Trial Court erred in holding that the victim girl was below 16 years on the date of the alleged incident; (iii) that the learned Trial Court failed to appreciate that the victim girl was a consenting party to the sexual relationship and, as such, the appellant cannot be said to have committed the offence of rape; (iv) that the learned Trial Court was oblivious of the fact that the pregnancy of the victim girl, as claimed by the prosecution, was doubtful; (v) that the learned Trial Court also failed to appreciate that there was inordinate delay of fifteen months in lodging the First Information Report and the reasons provided by the prosecution for such delay was not sufficient and satisfactory; and (vi) that the judgment being otherwise bad in law, is liable to be set aside.
(3.) This case was initiated by Rekha Sardar, aged 17 years on 08.03.2006, by way of lodging one First Information Report in Tehatta Police Station. The allegations in the First Information Report lodged by her, in a nutshell, is that on 01.01.2005, Nikhil Sardar, the appellant herein, who happened to be a neighbour of the victim, called her at his residence in absence of all the inmates of Nikhil Sardar. The victim girl, Rekha went to Nikhil's house on good faith but Nikhil forcibly committed sexual intercourse with her against her will and when she tried to raise hue and cry, she was assured by Nikhil that he would marry her. Relying on such assurance of Nikhil, Rekha and Nikhil continued their sexual relation till Rekha conceived and was carrying for four months. When pregnancy of Rekha was made public and Nikhil was asked to marry Rekha by the villagers in a salish, he initially agreed to marry her but, afterwards, refused to do so. Since Nikhil refused to marry Rekha, Rekha lodged the First Information Report and, accordingly, Tehatta Police Station Case No. 55 of 2006 was started and investigated into. In course of investigation, statement of the victim Rekha was recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Rekha was medically examined. On conclusion of investigation, the Investigating Officer of the case submitted charge sheet against the appellant under Sections 376/417 of he Indian Penal Code.;