The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliability of the victim's testimony, the significance of corroborating evidence, and the interpretation of medical evidence in cases of sexual assault involving minors.

JUDGMENT

Joymalya Bagchi, J. - With the consent of the parties, the appeal is taken up for hearing. The appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 25.11.2014 and 26.11.2014 respectively passed by the learned additional District & Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Krishnagar, Nadia, in Sessions Trial Case No. 1(IX) of 2014 arising out of Sessions Case No. 3(2) of 2014 (Spl.) convicting the appellant for commission of offence punishable under Section 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences act and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months more.

Prosecution case, as alleged, against the appellant is to the effect that on 05.05.2013 at 3.30 p.m. minor daughter of the de facto complainant/P.W. 1 was subjected to penetrative sexual assault by the appellant who is the uncle of the father of the victim. Minor girl disclosed the incident to her mother and F.I.R. came to be registered. Victim was medically treated at aronghata B.P.H.C. and then at Ranaghat S.D. Hospital. Her statement was recorded before the learned Magistrate. appellant was arrested and charge-sheet was filed. Charges were framed against the appellant under Section 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences act. The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. In conclusion of trial, the appellant was convicted and sentenced, as aforesaid.

Mr. Ganguly, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant argues that the prosecution case suffers from various inconsistencies and contradictions. The appellant has been falsely implicated in the instant case due to a land dispute. There is variation in the injuries noted by P.W. 3 and P.W. 5 and the charge of forcible rape is not proved. Hence, conviction of the appellant may be set aside and the appellant is entitled to an order of acquittal.

On the other hand, Mr. Das, learned Counsel appearing for the State argues the version of the victim girl who was aged about 6 years at the time of the occurrence is corroborated by her relations as well as neighbours. Medical evidence also supports penetrative sexual assault on her. Hence, the appeal is liable to be dismissed.

P.W. 1 is the minor victim who was 8 years old at the time of examination. Trial Court put questions to her which were answered by her intelligently. Being satisfied with her competence to depose, her evidence was recorded. She stated that she used to refer to the appellant as 'Dadu'. On the date of occurrence at about 11-30/12-00 noon when she was returning home after purchasing groceries, the appellant pulled her frock and took her to the courtyard of her 'Jethi' alpana Pal. There he gagged her mouth and took her to his room. He bit her breasts and committed rape on her. appellant threatened her not to disclose the incident to anyone. She narrated the incident to her mother. She was taken to Dhantala Police Station by her parents and thereafter to the hospital. Doctor examined her and thereafter she was taken to Ranaghat court where she made statement before the learned Magistrate. She was extensively cross-examined. However, no significant variation or contradiction was elicited from the minor during cross-examination.

Her deposition is supported by her mother (P.W. 2) and her father (P.W. 6).

P.W. 2 is the mother of the victim and informant in the instant case. She stated that the appellant is their relative and adjacent neighbour. at the time of the incident she was sleeping in the house. Her daughter returned to home and she found bite marks on her breast.

Initially her daughter was unable to disclose anything. Upon persuasion she narrated the incident to her. Thereafter, she lodged complaint to Dhantala Police Station. She put signature on the written complaint marked as 'Exhibit - 2'. In cross-examina