The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliability of the testimony of a child witness, the consideration of direct ocular evidence and medical evidence, and the acceptance of minor contradictions in witness testimonies.

JUDGMENT

Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J. - The instant appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction dated 26.02.2020 and 27.02.2020 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge Bolpur, Birbhum in Sessions Trial No. 05( June) 2017 arising out of Sessions Case No. 56 of 2017, convicting the appellant for the offences punishable under section 302/448 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. On 10.06.2016 at about 08:45 Hrs. one Katu Ruidas lodged a written complaint in Illambajar P.S. stating, inter alia, that his daughter Smt. Anna Ruidas was married to one Kajol Ruidas of village Tarapur under P.S. Illambazar sometimes in the year 2002. It was also stated in the written complaint that her neighbour Subhas Ruidas and his family members used to tease his daughter since long and used to keep a bad eye upon her. On 09.06.2016 at about 1 a.m. when there was no one in the house, the said Subhas Ruidas with his family members entered into the house of Anna Ruidas being armed with lathi, rod etc. and killed her. The written complaint also narrates that in the following morning when the family members of Anna Ruidas returned back, the accused persons threatened and attacked them with lathi, rod etc. It is further stated that her daughter Anna Ruidas was killed in presence of her younger son Surya Ruidas who was then seven years old. The aforesaid complaint also named as many as 11 persons as the culprits.

3. On the basis of such written complaint, Ilambazar P.S. Case No. 94 dated 10.06.2016, was started against 11 accused persons including the present appellant.

4. The police took up investigation and on completion of investigation submitted charge-sheet under Section 448/302/120B against six accused persons. Accordingly, upon appearance of the accused persons and after compliance of the provision under Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused was committed to the Court of Session for trial.

5. In consideration of the materials in the CD, charges under Section 448/302/120B IPC were framed against the six accused persons.

6. In course of trial, the prosecution examined as many as nine witnesses in all. Upon consideration of the testimony of the witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution and also upon examining the accused persons under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, five accused persons were acquitted under Section 335(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, whereas, the accused Subhasis Ruidas, i.e. the present appellant, was convicted for the offences punishable under Section 448/302 of the Indian Penal Code by the impugned judgment.

7. The appellant seeks to assail the impugned judgment and order of sentence on the ground that the same is based on conjectures and surmises and that the necessary ingredients of the offence have not been established on the basis of the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution and as such the impugned order is liable to be set aside. It has also been stated on behalf of the appellants that learned Court below erred in holding the appellant guilty on the basis of sole testimony of a child witness. The impugned judgment is also sought to be assailed on the ground that the prosecution has failed to produce vital witness which would be giving rise to an adverse interference against the prosecution case. It has also been set up that the testimony of the prosecution witnesses are inconsistent and contradictory and order of conviction on the basis of such evidence, is not sustainable.

8. So far as the present factual backdrop of the case, it is the story line put forward by the prosecution that in the night of 09/10th June 2016, the appellant, along with other family members, entered into the house of the victim Anna Ruidas at about 01.00 a.m. being armed with lathi, rod, pillow etc. and killed Anna Ruidas in presence of her two minor sons. At that time, there was no one in the house, the husband of the victim had gone to another village to meet his relatives.

9. F