JUDGMENT :

DEBANGSU BASAK, J.

1. Appellant has assailed the judgment of conviction dated February 15, 2020 and the order of sentence dated February 17, 2020 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, 4th Court, Asansol in Sessions Trial No. 39 of 2012 arising out of Sessions Case No. 53 of 2012.

2. By the impugned judgment of conviction, the learned judge has found the appellant to be guilty under Section 302/379 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The learned Trial Judge had acquitted the appellant of the charges under Section 376 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. By the impugned order of sentence, learned Trial Judge has sentenced the appellant to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000 and in default to suffer further imprisonment of two months punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and to undergo six months imprisonment for committing the offence under section 379 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

3. The case of the prosecution at the trial had been that the appellant on April 7, 2012 in the mid night, nearby a pond at Korapara, Ranisayer under Raniganj Police Station, District-Burdwan, committed rape on the victim and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The appellant had also murdered the victim and thereby committed an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The appellant had stolen one silver chain and money purse taken out of the possession of the victim intending to take such articles dishonestly without her consent thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The appellant had also on the same day, time and place dishonestly received and retained property belonging to the victim which were recovered from the possession of the appellant on April 20, 2012. The appellant had retained such stolen property belonging to the victim knowing the same to the stolen properties and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 411 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

4. A Sub-inspector of Police had lodged a written complaint with regard to the information that he had received relating to a female dead body. On the basis of such written complaint, a formal First Information Report being Raniganj Police Station FIR No. 111/12 dated April 8, 2012 under Section 376/302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 had been registered. Police had investigated the same. On conclusion of the investigations, police had filed a charge sheet bearing No. 94/12 dated June 20, 2012 under Section 376/302/34/379/411 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the two accused including the appellant.

5. Charges against the two accused, including the appellant, had been framed on September 14, 2012 under Sections 376/302/379/411 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The appellant and the co-accused had pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. At the trial, the prosecution had examined 26 witnesses and relied upon various documentary and material exhibits to bring home the charges against the accused including the appellant.

7. Learned advocate appearing for the appellant has submitted that, the Trial Court framed 4 charges against the appellant. He has drawn the attention of the Court to the charges framed. He has contended that, a charge of rape under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 was also framed as against the appellant and that of murder under Section 302 thereof. The learned Trial Judge had found the appellant to be not guilty of the offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. According to him, since the charge of rape and murder were related to each other, with the charge of rape not being established beyond reasonable doubt, the charge of murder cannot be said to have been proved beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution against the appellant. According to him, failure of the prosecution to prove the charge of rape has negatively affected the claim of the prose