Bibek Chaudhuri, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction dated 20th/21st August, 2015 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court, Howrah in Sessions Trial No.76 of 2011 whereby and whereunder the learned judge has convicted the appellant for the offence under Section 376(f) of the Indian Penal Code (hereafter the IPC) and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years with fine of Rs.10,000/- only, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a term of six months.
(2.) Aggrieved by and dissatisfied with such judgment and order of conviction, the appellant has preferred the instant appeal on amongst other grounds that the learned trial judge failed to appreciate the evidence of the victim and her mother, who was the defacto complainant of the case, in its true perspective; failed to consider the effect of delay in lodging FIR in a case of rape; further failed to take into account that there was no medical report in support of the allegation of rape against the accused/appellant and also that in view of consistent change of narration as to how, when and where the alleged incident took place, the accused/appellant ought not to have been held guilty for committing an offence under Section 376(f) of the IPC.
(3.) The case of the prosecution as unfolded in the first information report is that on 25th December, 2009 at about 5 p.m, the victim, a minor girl of approximately 11 years of age, was returning home from a neighbouring house where she used to work as domestic help. Then the appellant called her and forcibly took her to his room and tortured her physically. Due to such torture, the victim was feeling pain all over her body. As noted above, the mother of the victim is the defacto complainant who lodged the first information report containing the above statement on 26th December, 2009 at about 11.15 a.m.;