ASIM KUMAR RAY, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against an order of conviction and sentence passed in Sessions Case No. 79(7) of 2005 wherein appellants were sentenced to suffer R.I. for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/ - in default to suffer R.I. for one month for the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and also to suffer R.I. for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000/ - each, in default to suffer R.I. for 3 months for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code.
(2.) FACTUAL matrix leading to the initiation of the prosecution case is that Rita Pal got married with accused Gopal Pal 2 /3 years ago from the date of filing the FIR by Ava Pal, mother of Rita Pal. Her husband Gopal Pal and mother -in -law Saila bala Pal started physical and mental torture upon her just after a few days of her marriage. She was also assaulted by both of them on several occasions as the de facto complainant , her mother failed to meet the demand of her husband Gopal for payment of Rs. 10,000/ -. On 17 -9 -2000 at night Gopal and his mother forcefully made Rita consume acid as a result she became seriously ill. She was taken to Bethuadahari Hospital and from there she was referred to Saktinagar Hospital and later to N.R.S. Medical College and Hospital on 20 -9 -2000. On the basis of the written complaint of Ava Pal, Nakashipara Police Station Case No. 180 of 2000 dated 4 -11 -2000 under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code was started. On completion of investigation of the case charge sheet under Sections 498A/326/307 of IPC was filed against Gopal Pal and his mother Saila bala Pal. Charge under the said Sections of IPC was framed against Gopal Pal and Sailabala Pal. They pleaded not guilty to the said charge and claimed to be tried. In order to bring the offence home to the accused persons prosecution has examined as many as 20 witnesses and in course of examination of prosecution witnesses series of documents have been marked as exhibits. On appreciation of the evidence on record the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Krishnagar, Nadia has found the appellants guilty, convicted them and passed the impugned sentence. Being aggrieved this appeal is before us.
(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants has contended that the impugned order of conviction and sentence is illegal. It is based on inadmissible evidence but not on material on records. The learned Judge has not considered the case of the defence in its proper perspective and the same has resulted in total miscarriage of justice. It is his further contention that the FIR maker had been to Saktinagar Hospital on 18th September, 2000. She met with her daughter victim Rita Pal. But the first information report was lodged on 4th November,2000. Such inordinate delay in lodging the FIR is fatal to the prosecution case. It is his further contention that the witnesses who were examined from the side of the prosecution are all relatives of the victim and are interested witnesses. The evidence on record speaks that Gopal took his wife Rita, the victim to hospital to save her. The evidence of P.W.17 Dr. Sovan Bisws was placed by the learned counsel of the appellant to show that acid entered into the stomach and this suggest that it was consumed but not administered forcefully. The doctor has stated in his evidence that there is no scope for the person like the victim to speak after such intake of acid. The case of the prosecution is full of doubt. Evidence on record cannot be relied on to record an order of conviction and sentence and so may be set aside.;