The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for trustworthy and unassailable witness testimony, the need for medical evidence to prove charges of sexual assault, and the duty of the appellate court to reappraise evidence in criminal appeals.

JUDGMENT

Bibek Chaudhuri, J. - These two appeals arose assailing the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, First Court and Special Court under the POCSO Act, Kakdwip in Special Sessions Trial No.7 of 2018 under Sections 366/376/120B of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C. for short) and also under Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

2. The appellant in Criminal Appeal No.269 of 2019 was convicted for committing offence under Section 366/120B/376 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 4 of the POCSO Act. The learned trial Judge handed down sentence of imprisonment for three years with fine and default clause for the offence under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code. He was also sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years with fine and default clause for the offence punishable under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The convict Subrata Pradhan was also sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years with fine and default clause for the offence committed under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. He was also sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years with fine and default clause for the offence committed under Section 4 of the POCSO Act. It was directed that the sentences of imprisonment shall run concurrently.

3. In Criminal Appeal No.270 of 2019 the convicts, namely, Prasanta Das and Sampa Das were sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years with fine and default clause for committing offence under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code and also sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years with fine and default clause for the offence under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

4. On 14th December, 2017 a school going girl was kidnapped by the appellants on her way to school at about 9 A.M. She was taken to some unknown place by a car. It is also the case of the prosecution that for a considerable period of time before the incident Subrata Pradhan used to tease the girl and give her bad proposal whenever he found her on the road. He also proposed to marry her. The victim girl informed the matter to her parents and other elderly persons in her house. The de facto complainant, being the uncle of the victim girl used to escort her up to the bus stand of their village, commonly known as 5 No. Bus Stand. On the date of occurrence he could not accompany the victim girl and taking opportunity of his absence the said girl was forcibly kidnapped from the bus stand.

5. On the basis of the said complaint, police registered Gangasagar Coastal P.S. Case No. 125 of 2017 on 15th December, 2017 under Section 363/366/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

6. Since the allegation involves commission of sexual intercourse with a minor girl, the case was transferred to the Court of the learned Special Judge at Kakdwip for trial and on completion of the trial the learned Special Judge has passed the order of conviction and sentence as narrated hereinabove.

7. In Rama versus State of Rajasthan reported in (2002) 4 SCC 571 the Hon'ble Supreme Court has expressed about the duty of the Appellate Court in the following words:-

'It is well-settled that in a criminal appeal, the duty is enjoined upon the Appellate Court to reapprise the evidence itself and it cannot proceed to dispose of the appeal upon apprisal of evidence by the trial Court alone especially when the appeal has been already admitted and placed for final hearing. Upholding such a procedure would amount to negation of valuable right of appeal of an accused, which cannot be permitted under law.'

8. The Hon'ble Apex Court reiterated the same guideline regarding the duty of the Appellate Court while hearing an appeal subsequently in Md. Ali @ Guddu versus State of U.P., 2015 AIR SCW 1711.

9. Bearing the above principle in mind let me now reconsider and reappreciate the evidence adduced by the witnesses on behalf of the prosecution in the instant case. It is not in dispute that the victim was