The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for conclusive evidence to determine the age of a minor victim, the importance of reliable and consistent testimony, and the granting of the benefit of doubt in cases where the prosecution's narrative lacks authenticity and reliability.

Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J.

Appellant Bappa Pahari has been found guilty for an offence punishable under Section 363 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years as well as to pay fine appertaining to Rs. 2,000/-, under Section 366A of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years as well as to pay fine appertaining to Rs. 2,000/-, under Section 376 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years as well as to pay appertaining to Rs. five thousand and in default thereof, to undergo R.I. for six months with regard to all the offences with a further direction to run the sentences concurrently, with a further direction that the period having undergone during course of trial would be set off in accordance with Section 428 of the Cr.P.C. with a further direction that the fine amount if deposited, the half of the same be given to the victim as compensation, by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Katihar in Sessions Trial No.329 of 2013 vide judgment of conviction dated 31.08.2015 and order of sentence dated 03.09.2015.

2. For an occurrence allegedly committed on 25.09.2012, written report was filed by the informant Nazmul Haque (PW-5) on 09.10.2012, alleging inter alia that on 25.09.2012 at about 7.30 P.M. his minor daughter victim (name withheld), who is a student of Class-VII, aged about 14 years has been enticed away by Biren Pahari, wife of Biren Pahari, Shankar Pahari, Khirod Pahari, Rupali Devi, Bhawani Devi, Shakuntla Devi, Bappa Pahari.

Furthermore, he shown his apprehension that his minor daughter might have subjected to sexual intercourse against her will or would be murdered or would be sold to for illegal purpose. It has further been disclosed that as Biran Pahari, on query promised to return the victim, but took the time on one pretext or other, on account thereof, delay has been caused in filing of the written report.

3. After registration of Barsoi (Kachna O.P.) P.S. Case No.199 of 2012, investigation was taken up during midst thereof, victim was recovered, statement of the witnesses were recorded, victim was medically examined, her statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. was also facilitated and then thereafter, completing the investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the appellant keeping the investigation pending against the others which happens to be the basis for trial, meeting with the ultimate result, subject matter of instant appeal.

4. Defence case, as is evident from mode of cross-examination as well as statement recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. is that of complete denial. Though, no ocular evidence has been adduced, but medical evidence has been by way of formal witness as Exhibit-A.

5. In order to substantiate its case, prosecution had examined altogether seven PWs, who are PW-1, Basanti Devi, PW-2, Kalwa Pahari, PW-3, Razia Khatoon, PW-4, Raja @ Ramzan Ali, PW-5, Nazmul Haque, PW-6, Vishal Kumar Singh and PW-7, victim. Side by side, had also exhibited, Exhibit-1, written report, Exhibit-1/1 endorsement over the written report, Exhibit-2, charge-sheet, Exhibit3, formal F.I.R., Exhibit-4, statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. Defence had also exhibited medical report as Exhibit-A.

6. It has been submitted on behalf of appellant that the finding recorded by the learned lower Court happens to be illegal, perverse, and cryptic on account thereof, is fit to be set aside. Furthermore, it has also been submitted that knowingly, intentionally, doctor has not been examined at the end of the prosecution with a purpose, which is as per finding of the doctor, age of the victim was ascertained in between 16-17 years and so, giving two years of grace, victim was major. She was a consenting party and so, being a major, the consent having at her end is found duly recognizable in the eye of law, whereupon the learned lower Court would have acquitted the appellant.

7. Then, it has been submitted that from the evidence of I.O. (PW-6), it is evident that vict