The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of establishing a complete chain of circumstances and the credibility of witness testimonies in proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt in cases based on circumstantial evidence.

JUDGMENT :

Jay Sengupta, J.

This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 23rd December 2003 passed by the Learned Sessions Judge in ST Case No. 450/03, thereby convicting the appellant under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for another six months.

2. On 13th February 2002 at about 13:05 hours, PW 1 lodged a First Information Report under Section 376 read with Section 511 of the Penal Code alleging that on 12th February 2002 at about 20:00 hours, the appellant took his minor daughter to a lonely place of Gajipur Hospital, sexually harassed her and raped her. His daughter was growing up in his father-in-law's house. Hearing her shouts, the informant's mother-in-law PW 4 rushed to the spot and the appellant fled away. With the help of some local youths, PW 4 admitted the victim at the Amta Hospital in an injured and bleeding condition. As the informant was busy in his daughter's treatment that night, he submitted the complaint on the next day. The victim girl was about 5 years old at the date of occurrence.

3. After completion of investigation the Investigating Officer PW 10 filed a charge-sheet. On 8th September 2003 a charge was framed against the appellant under Section 376 of the Penal Code. The appellant pleaded not guilty and the trial started. The prosecution examined 10 witnesses to bring home the charge.

4. From a careful reading of the evidence on record, it appears that PW 1 was the de facto complainant of the case and the father of the minor victim. He received information about the incident after the victim had been admitted in Hospital. The attending doctor and nurse told him that the victim had been raped and that she had taken the name of the appellant as the perpetrator of the crime. His parents-in-law also narrated the incident. The appellant was a neighbour of the victim and her grand-parents. PW 1 found blood oozing out from his daughter's private parts for which she was shifted to Uluberia Hospital. The victim told him that the appellant had called her near her house and taken her to a place where he committed rape on her. The incident took place in a lonely place near the Hospital. The victim was discharged after a week. PW 1 then lodged a First Information Report scribed by PW 5. In the cross-examination PW 1 denied that his daughter was suffering from any urinary trouble for which she had to be taken to the Hospital. But thereafter he said that the urinary trouble started after she was ravished. PW 2 was the minor victim girl. After interrogating her, the Learned Trial Court held that she could not be examined as a witness and opined that her age would be between 3 and 4 years. PW 3 was the rickshaw van puller who carried the victim to Amta Hospital. He deposed that the victim used to stay at her maternal uncle's house due to death of her mother. He admitted that there was a discussion about an incident. PW 3 was declared hostile and the Learned Trial Court recorded that it was clear from the demeanour of the witness that he was withholding the truth. PW 4 was the maternal grand-mother of the victim. She was an immediate post- occurrence witness. In the fateful evening after PW 4 returned home, she did not find the victim home. She searched for her. Upon enquiry, PW 6, the daughter-in-law of her brother-in-law told her that she had last seen the victim in the lap of the appellant. PW 4 further deposed that they started searching for the victim. She had a lantern in her hand and PW 6 had a torch. They finally found the victim lying under the 'lungi' of the appellant and seeing them, the appellant pushed them and fled away. The victim was weeping. Blood was coming out of her vagina. With the help of a trolley van, they first shifted the victim to Amta Hospital and then to Uluberia Hospital. The victim was discharged from the hospital after 6/