C.R.SARMA
Sahidul Islam – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam – Respondent
2. By the impugned judgment and order, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellant, under section 376, IPC and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for four years and pay fine of Rs. 1,000, in default, undergo simple imprisonment for another period of one year.
3. Aggrieved by the said judgment and order, the convicted person, as appellant, has come up with this appeal, on the grounds that the learned Sessions Judge committed error by failing to correctly appreciate the evidence-on-record, the provision of section 90 of the Indian Penal Code (TPC) and the consequence of delay in lodging the case.
4. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the appellant, who was known to the informant, developed affairs with the informant's daughter and established physical relationship with her with promise of marriage. Consequent upon the said physical relationship, the informant's daughter became pregnant. Though the victim women, i.e., informant's daughter, had requested the appellant to marry her, he declined t
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.