The consistent and credible testimony of the victim is crucial in cases of sexual assault, and the application of legal provisions must be carefully considered based on the specific circumstances of the offense.

JUDGMENT

2. Tirthankar Ghosh, J. - The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 21.12.2018 and 24.12.2018 passed by the Learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ranaghat, Nadia in Sessions Trial No. 3(06)2010 corresponding to Sessions Case No. 31(02)/2009 arising out of Ranaghat Police Station Case No.274 of 2008 dated 01.09.08 under Section 376(f) of the Indian Penal Code The genesis of the case relates to a complaint lodged by PW2 (hereinafter referred to as 'the complainant') with the Inspector-in-charge, Ranaghat Police Station. The complainant claimed that Sakshi Gopal Das was a neighbour in Beltala, Nasra and that he used to come to the complainant's paternal house, and that on 30.08.2008 said Sakshi Gopal Das (accused/appellant) came to their house and invited them to puja. On the said date when the complainant along with her daughter went to the house of the accused/appellant on the occasion of 'Sani Puja' and stayed there in the night. On 31.08.2008 at about 1.30 pm at noon her minor daughter 'X' aged about 7 years 11 months was missing and reasonable search did not yield any result. However, after sometime she found her daughter stepping down from the upstairs room of the appellant/accused and told her that the accused had taken her upstairs to tell her story. Thereafter, her minor daughter 'X' complained of pain and irritation at her private parts and when she asked her, 'X' narrated that the accused had taken her upstairs, striped down her pant and inserted his penis into her vagina and also threatened her not to divulge to anyone or he would kill her.

3. On hearing such fact the complainant checked the child PW3 and found that there was blood and semen spotted at her sexual organ. She alleged that the accused/appellant committed rape upon her minor daughter by using her simplicity. Accordingly, she prayed for taking steps against the accused.

4. Police authorities on receipt of information registered the aforesaid case and after completion of investigation submitted charge-sheet under Section 376(f) of the Indian Penal Code. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions and finally the records were transmitted to the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranaghat, Nadia. After compliance with supply of copies relied upon by the prosecution the learned trial Court framed charges under Section 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code.

5. The prosecution in order to prove its case relied upon PW1, Bimal Kundu, landlord of the complainant; PW2, Complainant 'Y' and mother of the victim girl; PW3. 'X', victim girl; PW4, Munmun Bose is the cousin elder sister of PW2; PW5 'Z', father of the victim girl; PW6, Tilak Basu, acquaintance of the complainant's family; PW7, Dr. Amit Mukherjee, doctor who treated the victim girl; PW8, Mili Dey, younger sister of PW2; PW9, ASI Indrajit Mondal who received the written complaint in the police station and PW10, Nihar Ranjan Sarkar, Investigating Officer of the case.

6. Prosecution also relied upon 7 documents being Ext.1/1, written complaint; Ext.2, statement of the victim girl under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure; Ext.3 is the Medical Report of the victim; Ext.4, Formal FIR; Ext.5 is the rough sketch map with index; Ext.6, seizure list and Ext.7, Medical Report of the accused.

7. PW1, Bimal Kundu is the landlord of the residence of the premises where the complainant, victim resided. He deposed before the Court that on 30.08.2008 the complainant and her daughter had been to the house of the accused being invited on the occasion of 'Sani Puja'. On 31.08.2008 they returned and after coming back the girl was crying in the evening and hearing such cry he went upstairs and asked her mother why she was weeping, in reply the complainant told her that the accused had taken the victim to the first floor and had ravished her. Hearing this he rang up the accused and his wife picked up the phone. The wife of the accused