Siddhartha Chattopadhyay, J. - (1.) Doubting the correctness of the judgment passed in S.T. No. 03(06) of 2014, the appellant has preferred this appeal. According to the appellant, the learned trial court failed to appreciate the position of law as well as the evidence of the prosecution witnesses in its proper perspectives. According to him, the learned trial court failed to consider the factual aspects and the probability factors.
(2.) As against the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the state contended that the learned trial court had considered legal aspects and all other material aspects in its proper perspectives and so the judgment passed by the learned trial court is quite unimpeachable.
(3.) In the interest of effective adjudication, factual scenario of this case is required to be visualised. Shorn of unnecessary details, the prosecution case in a nutshell is such that on 17.08.2012, when the victim was sleeping alone in her house, the accused entered into her room and committed rape upon her forcibly. According to the victim, at that relevant point of time, her husband was not present. He had gone to some other place for his work. When the accused was committing rape upon her, somehow the victim had been able to flee away and screamed for help. Thereafter, she had disclosed the ill-episode to her brother-in-law (husband's brother). When her brotherin-law went to ascertain the fact from the accused, the present appellant accused assaulted him mercilessly and for which the victim's brother-in-law had to take admission in a nursing home for getting medical treatment. After a few while, the F.I.R. was lodged and in this way law was set into motion.;