JOYMALYA BAGCHI, J. - (1.) Judgement and order dated 8.9.2015 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Krishnagar, Nadia in S.T. Case No.II (VII) of 2015 and Sessions Case No.6 (04) of 2015 (Special) convicting the appellant for commission of offence punishable under Section 8 of POSCO Act and directing him to undergo imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months more is assailed herein.
(2.) Prosecution case, as alleged, against the appellant is to the effect that on 27.4.2015 at about 4.00 P.M., the victim girl aged about 5 years 8 months returned home and informed her mother, P.W.2 that she was feeling burning sensation and blood was oozing out from her private parts. Upon removing her wearing apparels, it was found that blood was oozing out from her private parts and her inner garment was stained with blood. On interrogating her, she revealed that the appellant had caught hold of her while she was playing in the field with Bani, Ridhhi and Soni and pushed his finger into her vagina. The victim further stated that the appellant had tried to put his penis into her vagina also. Over such issue, first information report was lodged against the appellant being Haringhata Police Station Case No.150 of 2015 dated 27.4.2015 under Section 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code and under section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. The victim was medically treated and upon completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed under the aforesaid sections against the appellant. Charges were framed under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. In the course of trial, prosecution examined fourteen witnesses and exhibited number of documents. The defence of the appellant was one of innocence and false implication. It was his specific defence that his sister-in-law had contested the Gram Panchayat Election on the ticket of a rival political party and accordingly, he had been implicated at the behest of the P.W.10 who is a member of the ruling elite. However, the appellant did not adduce any evidence to probabilise such defence in the course of trial. In conclusion of trial, the trial judge by judgement and order dated 8.9.2015 convicted and sentenced the appellant, as aforesaid.
(3.) Mr. Kabir, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that the evidence of P.W.1 and her relations suffered from gross embellishments and were even disbelieved by the trial court. Hence, the allegation of aggravated sexual assault was not believed and the evidence of the victim as well as her relations is squarely improbabilised by lack of support from P.W.6 who is a vital witness in the instant case. It is further submitted that the evidence of P.W.7 and 12, the medical witnesses are contrary to one another and, therefore, the appellant ought to have been acquitted of the charges levelled against him. It is also submitted that the appellant belongs to a rival political party and, therefore, there is every likelihood of his false implication in the instant case at the behest of his political opponents. Accordingly, he prayed for acquittal of the appellant.;