The reliability of the victim's testimony and the principle that minor discrepancies should not overshadow trustworthy evidence.

JUDGMENT

Sugato Majumdar, J. - The instant appeal is filed against judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29/01/2016 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Second Court, Contai, Purba Medinipur in Sessions Trial No. 02/September/2012 convicting the appellant under section 354 of the Indian Penal Code. Genesis of the case is the written complaint made by Nilkamal Mondal, the father of the victim girl wherein it was stated that on 25/02/2012 in the evening at about 5:30 P.M. the appellant took his minor daughter to a nearby field on the pretext of giving her some beans and raped her forcefully. At night, after dinner when the victim went to bed with her mother, she felt unbearable pain in her genital. When her mother interrogated her she disclosed the incident to her. A written complaint was lodged which was received in Egra Police Station on 26/02/2012 at 17:05 hours. On the basis of the written complaint formal F.I.R. was drawn up and Egra Police Case No. 33 of 2012 dated 26/02/2012 under Section 376 (2) (f) of I.P.C. was initiated.

2. The Investigating Officer visited the place of occurrence, prepared rough sketch map, examined the witnesses and recorded their statements under section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, got the victim medically examined; he also got the accused, the appellant medically examined. Statement of the victim was also recorded under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. On completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed. Charge was framed under Section 376 (2) (f) of the Indian Penal Code which was read over and explained the appellant to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Trial followed thereafter.

3. In course of trail eight witnesses were examined. The father of the victim, being the de-facto complainant was examined as P.W. 1; the mother of the victim as P.W. 4 and the victim was examined as P.W. 5. There were other witnesses including the doctors who examined the victim and the appellant as well as the Investigating Officer.

4. The Trial Court in terms of the impugned judgment held the appellant guilty of offence under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code and convicted him and passed order of sentence to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and pay a fine of Rs. 4000/- in default to suffer further imprisonment for six months.

5. On being aggrieved and dissatisfied with impugned judgment and order of sentence, the instant appeal is preferred, Mr. Samanta appearing for the appellant submitted that there is unexplained delay in lodging written complaint. For such delay creditworthiness of the written complaint becomes questionable.

6. Mr. Samanta further submitted that writer of the written complaint is not examined as a witness which is another reason to doubt the allegations contained therein.

7. Next point argued by Mr. Samanta is that there existed enmity and animosity between the family of the victim and that of the appellant. This appears from the statement of P.W. 2, namely, the de-facto complainant and P.W. 3 being the mother of the victim. He also invited attention to the cross- examination part of the victim where she stated that there were quarrels in between her mother and the mother of the appellant from time to time.

8. Suggestion was also given to the victim that her family members used to bring grocery articles from the shop of the appellant on credit and there was huge amount due and payable by the father of victim and that the appellant was not agreeable to give any grocery article on credit which led to animosity and subsequent false implication of the appellant in the instant criminal case.

9. Next point argued by Mr. Samanta is that the place of occurrence is not mentioned in the sketch map (Ext. 6) which is fatal for the prosecution case.

10. The place of occurrence is mentioned that 'doba' in the rough sketch map. No field of peas is mentioned in the said sketch map. The Investigating Officer being P.W. 6 was cro