- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State.
(2.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 7.2.2001 passed by Shri Dinesh Singh, learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Rajmahal in Sessions Trial Case No. 80 of 1997, by which judgment, he found the sole appellant, Bhupen Mandai guilty for the offence under Sections 376, 324 and 448 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous. imprisonment for ten years for the offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, one year under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and six months under Section 448 of the Indian Penal Code and all the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the conviction of the appellant under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code is bad in law, since, the defence has given the evidences to prove that the informant -victim Smt. Rakhi Devi had love affairs with the appellant and she used to write love letters to him. The love letters were filed in the court and marked as Exts. -x and x/6 for identification in the Court, but the court did not considered the same. The trial court also failed to consider the same that most of the witnesses have become hostile. In that view of the matter, the conviction under Sections 376, 324 and 448 is bad in law and fit to be set aside.
(3.) ON the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer and submitted that there are sufficient evidences including the evidence of the informant's husband, P.W. 13 as also the evidences of P.W. 7 and P.W. 10, the independent witnesses, who have supported the prosecution case, that the victim girl, Rakhi Devi was raped by the appellant in her house itself and he was caught red handed by the witnesses and handed over to the choukidar of the village to put him to police station, and as such, the case has been proved beyond reasonable doubts and, as such, the conviction of the appellant is well founded and requires no interference by this Court.;