Gorachand De, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against an order of conviction dated 27.5.1999 and sentence dated 28.5.1999 passed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Alipore in Sessions Trial No. 2(3)/99 arising out of Baruipur P. S. Case No. 264(8)795. By the said judgment, the learned Assistant Sessions Judge found the appellant Golam Mustafa Laskar guilty under section 376 of the IPC, convicted him thereunder and sentenced him to suffer R. I. for 10 years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default, to undergo R. I. for six months.
(2.) The prosecution case in brief is that one Aziman Bibi lodged a written complaint to the Officer-in-Charge, Baruipur Police Station on 30.8.95 alleging that on 26.8.95 in between 8 and 9 p.m. the appeallnt/convict Golam Mostafa Laskar came to their house when her minor daughter Mafuja Khatun and her youngest brother Raju aged about four years were reading in the verandah of their house. In that verandah one T. V. was being displayed. The convict started to witness the T. V. show and at that time the complainant and her husband were absent in that house and her youngest son Raju fell asleep. Suddenly, the current went off and taking this advantage the victim raped Mafuja Khatun causing bleeding injury on her private part. The complainant returned to their house and the current came back when she found the convict fleeing away. Victim was treated by a Medical Doctor and thereafter she was removed to Seva Tirtham Nursing Home as she was bleeding profusely. In the nursing home she was treated and in course of operation 4 bottles of blood had to be transfused and accordingly, there was a delay in lodging the complaint. On the basis of such written complaint, a formal FIR was drawn and investigation of the case was started. In course of investigation the minor girl was medically examined. Convict was also examined medically. After conclusion of investigation chargesheet was submitted against the present appellant/convict. Convict was arrested on 18.10.95 and subsequently, he was enlarged on bail.
(3.) As it was a case under section 376 of the IPC, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions on 2.2.99 after which charge under section 376 of the IPC was framed against the convict. Since the accused/convict pleaded not guilty to the charge, the prosecution examined as many as 21 witnesses including the Investigating Officer. However, no defence witness was examined. But the defence case as can be ascertained from the trend of cross-examination and the reply given by the accused in course of examination under section 313 of Cr. PC is that he did not come to the residence of the victim at the time of alleged incident and he was not involved in the alleged offence. The Trial Court after scanning the evidence on record and keeping in view the nature of the offence came to the conclusion that the charge against the victim was proved beyond all reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the convict/appellant was found guilty under section 376 of the IPC, was convicted thereunder and was sentenced in the manner indicated hereinabove.;