AGARTALA, India, Feb. 26 -- Tripura High Court issued the following order/judgement on Jan. 27:

[1] Heard Mr. Partha Sarathi Roy, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. Raju Datta, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State-respondent.

[2] This present appeal is filed under Section 374 of Cr. P.C against the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence dated 14.06.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, Khowai Judicial District, Khowai in case No. Special (POCSO) 09 of 2021 whereby the appellant has been convicted under section 42 of POCSO Act and sentenced to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 20 (twenty) years and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/(Rupees fifty thousand) only and in default of payment of the same, to suffer simple imprisonment for a term of 05(Five) months for commission of the offence punishable U/S 376AB of the IPC and in the alternative, under Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

[3] The prosecution story in brief is that one Shri Buddhi Mohan Debbarma, the informant lodged his ejahar before the OC, Mungiakami - PS, alleging the facts that on 19.04.2021 at about 07 AM, his minor daughter aged about 06 years, went to the house of the accused in their neighbourhood, then he committed rape upon her by pressing her mouth. After the incident, the minor victim returned back to her house crying and disclosed the matter to her mother. Subsequently, the informant stated to have heard about the incident from his wife and thereafter he asked his daughter and came to know about the entire incident. It is also stated that police officer attended the informant's house being informed about the incident and thereafter the written ejahar was lodged.

[4] On the basis of the said complaint, a case was registered at Mungiakami PS, vide No.2021/MGK/011 on 19.04.2021, U/S-376(2)(f) of the IPC read with Section 04 of the POCSO Act, against the accused Brajendra Debbarma and the same was endorsed to an SI for investigation. In course of investigation, the IO visited the place of occurrence, prepared a hand-sketchmap along with separate index and examined the victim girl along with other available witnesses. It was stated that on 19.04.2021, the accused had been arrested and forwarded before Court below and during investigation, the IO arranged for medical examination of the victim, as well as the accused and further seized various samples collected from their bodies including wearing apparels of the victim for the purpose of forensic examination. It was also stated that the IO collected all the forensic reports and medical examination reports and on completion of investigation, he found that a prima-facie Case was well established against the accused and hence, submitted charge-sheet bearing no.12/2021 dt.31.07.2021, U/S- 376(2) (f) of the IPC read with Sec-4 of the POCSO Act. Thereafter, during trial, upon consideration of the record and upon hearing submission of both sides, initially charge was framed U/S-376(3) of the IPC and U/S-4(2) of the POCSO Act against the accused, hearing the contents of the same, the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

[5] Subsequently, another charge U/S-376AB of the IPC and alternatively, U/S-5(m) of the POCSO Act was framed against the accused and hearing about the contents of the same, the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. In order to prove the charges framed against the accused, the prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses. The accused was also examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. wherein he denied all the incriminating materials, which appeared in the prosecution evidence against him and declined to adduce any evidence in his favour.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=bzPoyUlszYLCUcCpirIpqHezTOYsM%2FAbTRdhY3VFT58fdzK0RA9vjV16FnYYWaPq&caseno=Crl.A(J)/65/2024&cCode=1&cino=TRHC010016612024&state_code=20&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.