RANJIT KUMAR BAG,J. - (1.) The petitioner has preferred this revision praying for quashing of the criminal proceeding of Sessions Trial no. 54 of 2010 arising out of Sessions Case no.177 of 2009 pending before the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Katwa in the district of Burdwan.
(2.) It appears from record that the opposite party no. 2 filed a written complaint before the Officer-in-Charge of Ketugram Police Station on the basis of which Ketugram Police Station Case no. 11 of 2007 dated January 15, 2007 came into existence. The police investigated the said criminal case and submitted charge-sheet against the petitioner under Sections 376/420 of the Indian Penal Code. On April 26, 2010, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Katwa framed charge against the petitioner under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and proceeded with the hearing of the case. The petitioner, being the accused facing the trial, has prayed for quashing the criminal proceeding.
(3.) Mr. Sabir Ahmed, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the evidence collected by the Investigating Agency during investigation does not suggest commission of the offence by the petitioner under Sections 376/420 of the Indian Penal Code. The specific submission of Mr. Ahmed is that the prosecutrix was aged about 20 years and thereby she attained majority at the time of commission of the alleged offence. The further submission made by Mr. Ahmed is that the sexual intercourse took place with the consent of the prosecutrix and thereby no offence is made out against the present petitioner. According to Mr. Ahmed, the criminal proceeding is liable to be quashed.;