GUWAHATI, India, Oct. 2 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on Sept. 1:

1. Heard Ms. F. Intaz, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.

2. This is an application filed under Section 401 read with Section 397 of the Cr.PC for setting asidethe impugned Judgment & Order dated 04.03.2013 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Darrang,Mangaldoi in C.A. Case No. 34(D-4)11, by which the appeal was dismissed and the conviction and sentence was upheld.

3. The petitioner had also challenged the Judgment & Order passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Darrang, Mangaldoi in Sessions Case No. 53(DM-4)07, by which the Trial Court convicted the accused person under Section 376 IPC and sentenced him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 7 (seven) years with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) and in default, to undergo a further period of Rigorous Imprisonment for 6 (six) months. FACTS:

4. On 12.09.2007, an FIR was lodged by the mother of the victim stating, inter-alia, that the victim, who was aged 13 years, was taken by the petitioner to his house to do some domestic work, and he raped her, taking the advantage of absence of any person in his house. The informant stated that the incident had taken place 4 (four) months back to the lodging of the FIR. The informant also stated that the petitioner had threatened the victim and takingfurther advantage of the absence of occupants in the house,he forcibly raped the victim for another 2 (two) days. She also stated that the victim did not disclosed the incident out of fear and shamefulness and that when her menstruation cycle stopped, the victim reported to her neighbour and that the said fact surfaced. It is also stated that the victim was pregnant at the time of lodging of the ejahar. The Police, on receipt of the ejahar, registered the case under Section 376(f) of IPC.

5. On completion of the investigation, the Police submitted a Charge-sheet against the petitioner. Thereafter, on conclusion of the necessary requirements, charges were framed against the petitioner under Section 376 of IPC on 06.12.2007 and the trial was initiated.

6. During the trial, the prosecution examined 6 (six) witnesses and after examination of the accused person under Section 313 of the Cr.PC, the defence examined 3 (three) witnesses and thereafter, on conclusion of the trial, the petitioner was convicted under Section 376 IPC and was sentenced to undergo punishment as mentioned above. Aggrieved by the order of the Trial Court, the petitioner filed an appeal being CA Case No. 34(D-4)11 before the learned Sessions Judge, Darrang, Mangaldoi and the learned Sessions Judge vide Order dated 04.03.2013 upheld the order of the Trial Court and directed the petitioner to surrender before the Trial Court. Against the said Judgment, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing this instant Criminal Revision Petition.

EVIDENCE:

7. The victim was examined as PW-1 in the instant case and she stated before the Trial Court that during the delivery of her elder sister, the petitioner called her to his house and she went. The petitioner is the brother-in-law of the victim. She further stated that about 8-9 months earlier, the petitioner forcefully had sexual intercourse with her when her elder sister went to fetch water and that she did not reveal the incident to anyone as the petitioner threatened her but when she became pregnant, she told the incident to her paternal grandmother and the paternal grandmother told the incident to her father.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=T2Oj5Y97nX2tmju2FyqIU2xmjtPZtFtDQCkCnihvhdDkk%2Bmo577RoiwOvnjofda7&caseno=Crl.Rev.P./155/2013&cCode=1&cino=GAHC010233872013&state_code=6&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.