JUDGMENT

Debangsu Basak, J. - The appellants have assailed the judgement of conviction dated September 17, 2021 and the order of sentence dated September 21, 2021 passed by the Learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Purulia in SC (SPL) Case No. 34 of 2017. The appellants have been represented by the learned senior advocate Mr. Sandipan Ganguly and advocate Mr. Dipanjan Dutt as amicus curiae. By the impugned judgement of conviction and the order of sentence, the appellants had been held guilty of murdering a child of three years old and sentenced to death. A death reference has been made to this Hon'ble Court by reason of such order of sentence of death. The two appeals and the death reference have been heard analogously.

2. The case of the prosecution is that, Prosecution Witness (PW ) No. 1 had lodged a complaint with the police on July 14, 2017. In such complaint, he had stated that, he was working as coordinator of Non-Government Organization (NGO) Childline. On July 11, 2017 at night, a three years old girl child had been admitted at the Sadar Hospital at Purulia by her mother. He had learnt that the child had been severely physically tortured. When the child had been admitted to the hospital several injuries caused by nail were found on her body. The child had been in severe fear with dark circles under her eyes being indicative of torture. He had stated that, Mangala Goswami after some persuasion told him that, Sanatan Goswami Goswami had physically and sexually abused her daughter even after her prohibition and resistance and for that bleeding occurred.

3. The police had registered First Information Report being Purulia (M) Police Station Case No. 194/2017 dated July 14, 2017 against Sanatan Goswami for offence punishable under Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 376 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860. The victim had died on July 21 2017. The police had relied upon medical evidence and other materials gathered during investigation to contend that the appellants had murdered the victim. Police had submitted a charge sheet for offences punishable under Section 4 /6 of the Act of 2012 and Sections 326 / 307/ 302/ 376/ 201/ 120B of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 against both the appellants. The Court had framed charges under Section 6 of the Act of 2012 and Sections 376 (2)/ 302/ 120B/ 30B of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 against Sanatan Goswami and under Section 18 of the Act of 2012 and Sections 302 201/ 120B/ 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 against Mangala Goswami.

4. The appellants had pleaded not guilty at the trial. At the trial, the prosecution had examined 37 witnesses, tendered 51 documents as Exhibits which were marked as Exhibit 1 to 51 and also tendered various material exhibits being exhibits A to I. That apart, the appellants had tendered three documents as exhibits being exhibits A to C. The appellants, however, did not produce any witness for examination at the trial. At conclusion of the evidence on the part of the prosecution, the appellants had been examined under Section 313 of the CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE , 1973 where, they pleaded innocence and false implication.

5. Learned amicus curiae has submitted that, the victim was the child of Mangala Goswami. Mangala Goswami had been married with Lakshmikanta Goswami who deposed as PW 14.

6. Learned amicus