- (1.) This instant criminal appeal emanates from the judgment and order of conviction dated 20th February 2015 and 21st February 2015 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranaghat, Nadia in Sessions Trial No. 4(2)/2012. By the said judgment learned trial court has imposed punishment upon the appellant under section 376/365/419 of the Indian Penal Code to suffer sentence for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- for the offence under section 365 and 376 IPC and for three years more for the alleged offence under section 419 IPC. According to the appellant, learned court below could not appreciate the evidence in its proper perspective and in true spirit. There are enormous omissions and contradictions which would lead to the absurdity of the allegation. The learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant further argued that the story of section 365 does not lie because there was no such kidnapping at all. However, in the interest of effective adjudication, factual aspects needs to be revisited. Prosecution case in short as such that daughter of the defacto complainant had acquaintance with one Netai Sutradhar, a resident of Baninagar, PS Ranaghat. Netai Sutradhar met a boy who claimed himself as Officer-in-Charge of Burdwan PS.
(2.) The defacto complainant was searching for a groom and at the same time the said friend of Netai Sutradhar was also looking for his match for marriage. After hearing the matter the said Netai had brought the appellant to the house of the defacto complainant and in this way the victim became acquainted with him. Thereafter on 19th February 2011 he was taken to the victim's house and at that time the appellant disclosed that he liked the victim. Thereafter, the defacto complainant told him that marriage would be fixed after having a contact with the respective guardians. In the meantime, the accused, who disclosed his name, as Deep Sarkar asked the victim over phone to meet him and requested her to go to Ranaghat station. Accordingly, the victim told her mother that she would go to Ranaghat to see him off. Even on 25th February 2011 the victim did not come back and on that day the said Netai told that she was kept confined in a house at Ranaghat Rupashree Pally. He further added that the behaviour of the said Deep Sarkar (now Sankar Biswas, the appellant) is doubtful. The defacto complainant derived that her daughter was forcibly confined into a house near Ranaghat Rupashree Pally and she was raped against her will.
(3.) The defence case as it appears to me from the trend of cross-examination and examination of the accused under section 313 Cr.P.C is his innocence and that he has been falsely implicated. After registration of FIR, the investigating agency came into operation. In course of investigation I.O has recorded the statement of available witnesses under section 161 Cr.P.C, collected medical report of the victim as well as the accused and took steps for recording her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. and, thereafter, has filed chargesheet under the aforesaid sections. Pursuant to the charge-sheet submitted by the IO, the trial court has recorded evidence of the prosecution witness, considered the exhibited documents and after hearing arguments of both sides passed a judgment holding that the accused has committed offences under sections 376/365/419 IPC.;