J.N.Hore, J. - (1.) For committing rape on Nirupama Bank of village Kankabati, P.S. Kotwali, Midnapore District-Midnapore appellant Sushil Pati was convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Midnapore under section 376, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 4 years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- (one thousand), in default, rigorous imprisonment for one year more. The appellant, Seeks to assail the said order of conviction and sentence. While admitting the appeal a suo motu Rule was issued by this Court on the accused- appellant as to why the sentence should not be enhanced. Both the appeal and the Rule were heard together and this Judgment would, govern both.
(2.) Briefly stated, prosecution case is as follows:On 30.1.1985 at about 3-30 p.m. Nirupama Bank (P.W. 2), a minor girl aged about 12 years, was collecting cowdung cakes on the lonely field adjoining the river Kangsabati; Being chased by appellant Sushil Pati the girl fell into a ditch where she was caught and raped by the appellant. P.W. 5 Sabita Bera, who happened to be present at a distance, noticed the accused chasing the girl. She then came close to them and found the appellant committing sexual assault on Nirupama. Sabita immediately rushed to the house of Nirupama and reported the to her mother P.W1 Bimala Bank. After committing rape the appellant fled away. Nirupama came home weeping and reported the matter to her mother. The matter was immediately brought to the knowledge of the father arid elder brother of the appellant who are residents of the same village. They assured of an amicable settlement and agreed to the proposal of P.W. 1 Bimala Bank for marriage of Nirupama with the appellant but about a week after they backed out and arranged for marriage of the appellant with another girl. P.W. 1 accordingly lodged information with the police on 9.2.1985 on the basis of which a case under section 376, Indian Penal Code was registered against the appellant. After completion of investigation police submitted charge-sheet against the appellant under Section 376, Indian Penal Code which in the usual course ended in committal of the case to the court of Session. In defense, the accused pleaded innocence. The defense case was that the accused was falsely implicated out of political rivalry.
(3.) In order to bring home the charge to the accused, the prosecution examined 11 witnesses while the defense examined none. The first point for our consideration is whether the prosecution has been able to prove the charge under section 376, Indian Penal Code against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt and whether order of conviction can be sustained.;