Back
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Chaitali Chatterjee Das, J.
Sk. Babua @ Sariful SK – Appellant
versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent
CRA 576 of 2014
Decided on 6.4.2026
For the Appellant:Mr. Habibur Rahaman, Mr. Jaideep Basu, Mr. Archisman Singh and Mr. Kaustav Chatterjee, Advocates
For the Respondent-State:Mr. Avishek Sinha and Ms. Sreetama Das, Advocates
IMPORTANT POINT
Rape – In an offence of rape usually no eye witness can be found and evidence of victim if otherwise inspires confidence in mind of Court is to be given utmost importance.
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 376 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 357A – Rape – Conviction and sentence – Medical evidence may not be available and in such circumstance, solitary testimony of prosecutrix could be sufficient to base conviction – Since incident occurred in a remote part of village and victim as well as other witnesses are largely illiterate non-mentioning of date cannot be a ground to set aside judgment of conviction specially when appellant has failed to establish any alibi regarding his presence at place of occurrence – In every crime, there is first intention to commit, secondly preparation to commit it, thirdly attempt to commit it – If in third stage attempt is successful, then crime is complete – Evidence of victim of sexual harassment is to be believed if otherwise can inspire confidence in mind of Court – Conviction and sentence affirmed – District Legal Aid Services Authority directed to take appropriate steps for granting compensation to victim. (Paras 29, 30, 34, 35, 39, 42 and 45)
Result: Criminal Appeal dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Chaitali Chatterjee Das, J.—The instant appeal has been filed against an judgment and Order dated August 27, 2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-II, Howrah in ST No. 217 of 2009 arising out of Sankrail PS Case No.231/08, dated June 23, 2008, under Section 417/120B/376/506 of the Indian Penal Code, whereby convicting the present appellant under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to suffer Simple Imprisonment for six months.
Brief Resume of the Case:-
2. Victim being the daughter of the Gorai Sk of village Kannamuni, PS. Sankrail District, Howrah lodged a written complaint dated June 23, 2008 before the Sankrail PS alleging inter-alia that on May 29, 2008 at about 18:30 hours Akash Sk, son of her younger Uncle informed her that she was called by the present appellant, S/o Musa Sk of village Gondhorbapur, PS Sankrail, District Howrah for engaging her for some Jori work. Without any hesitation the victim proceeded to meet with the appellant and found him standing in a vacant place at the side of a ditch. She further alleged that initially the accused tried to outrage her modesty by tearing her apparels and on her raising hue and cry Ajmira Mistri, Jahanara Begum, Anjura Begum and many other villagers rushed to the place of occurrence and the accused fled away. It was also her case that after the incident all the villagers went to the house of the accused where it was agreed by his father Sk. Musa that she will be married with him. The victim being a poor lady was influenced by such assurance given by the father of the accused in presence of the villagers, but one month after when Sk. Musa and Sk. Moidul went for negotiation of such marriage they were denied and refused of any commitment. Accordingly, there is delay in lodging the complaint.
3. On the basis of such complaint the Sankrail PS Started the case and on completion of investigation submitted the charge sheet against the accused person being C.S No.07/09, dated January 15, 2009, under Section 417/120B/376/506 of the Indian Penal Code.
4. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Howrah took cognizance on February, 12, 2009 and on commitment the matter went before the learned Sessions Judge, Howrah on March, 19, 2009, wherefrom it was transferred to Fast Track Court for trial.
5. The learned Trial Court on considering the materials on record and hearing the parties framed the charge on December 10, 2009 under Section 376/417 of Indian Penal Code against the present appellant and separate charge under Section 417/120 B of Indian Penal Code were framed against the other two accused wherein all pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
6. The learned Trial Court on considering the evidences as adduced before him as well as considering the submissions made by both the learned Prosecution as well as the defence Counsels passed the order of conviction against the appellant and acquitted the other two accused from the charges under Section 417/120 B of the Indian penal Code. Being aggrieved thereby this appeal has been filed.
Submissions:-
7. The learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant argued, that the other two accused being Sk. Musa and Sk. Saidul are the father and elder brother of the present appellant were acquitted by the learned Trial Court when it was Akash who allegedly introduced the victim with the present appellant due to lack of evidence and the prosecution has not filed any appeal challenging the same.
8. Learned counsel for the accused-appellant submits that there are material contradictions in the statement of the complainant regarding the incident. It is argued that there is a gross delay in lodging the FIR, which has not been explained by the complainant when the delay was of more than one month. It is glaringly evident that there was a claim of Rs.40,000/- and when the appellant refused to fulfil such demand
