SIDDHARTHA CHATTOPADHYAY, J. - (1.) Challenging the legal pregnability of the judgment and order of conviction dated 30.06.2014 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Krishnagar, Nadia in Sessions Trial No. II (V)/2014 arising out of Sessions Case No. 3 (5) of 2014, the appellant has preferred this appeal. By the impugned judgment the learned Trial Court has convicted this appellant to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay fine of Rs.6,000/ - in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months more for the offence under Section 489 (C) of the Indian Penal Code.
(2.) According to the appellant, learned Trial Court failed to appreciate the evidence in it's proper perspectives. The appellant further agitated that search and seizure was not in conformity with the law and there are enormous omissions and contradictions in the testimony of the prosecution witnesses and if the said matter be considered properly in that case acquittal would be the only answer.
(3.) As against this, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the state contended that it is a very well -reasoned judgment and the learned Trial Court has taken care of all the material aspects properly and for that reason the impugned judgment is quite unimpeachable.;