Hitesh Kumar Sarma, J.

1. This criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the judgment and order dated 07.06.2014, and the sentence dated 11.06.2014, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kokrajhar, in Sessions Case No. 58 of 2008, under Sections 376 (2) (f) of the IPC, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 (ten) years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for further period of 2 (two) months. I have heard Mr. K. Sarma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of accused-appellant, and Mr. BJ Dutta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam. I have also perused the record of the learned trial Court including the evidence.

2. The prosecution case, as unfolded from the evidence on record, including the FIR, is that there was a picnic party arranged in the field in front of the house of the PW 5, Silpa Singh. The picnic was arranged in the late evening and it was over little after in the midnight. At the instance of PW 6, the mother of PW 5, the PW 5 and the victim PW 2 came to the house of PW 5 and slept on the same bed there. In the wee hours of the next morning, at about 2.00/2.30 a.m., the accused-appellant entered into the house by pushing the door and thereafter committed rape on the person of the victim, PW 2. The victim screamed following which the nearby people arrived at the place of occurrence. On such facts, the FIR, Ext. 4 was lodged with the Kokrajhar Police Station by Sri Sushil Ray, the father of the victim, PW 4.

3. On receipt of the FIR, being Exhibit 4, about the above occurrence, Kokrajhar Police Station registered a case, being Kokrajhar Police Station Case No. 04/2008, under Sections 376 (f) of the IPC.

4. The police visited the place of occurrence, prepared sketch map, got the victim admitted in the RNB Civil Hospital, Kokrajhar, got the statements of Smti Silpa Singh (PW 5), Smti Moina Singh (PW 6) and one Smti Sanu Barman recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C and, finally, on completion of the investigation, submitted charge-sheet against the accused-appellant, under Sections 376 (f) of the IPC.

5. After exhausting all required formalities, on appearance of the accused-appellant before the trial Court of learned Sessions Judge, Kokrajhar, he was furnished copies as required under Section 207 of the Cr.P.C. and after hearing him though his learned State defence counsel, framed a formal charge against him under Section 376(2)(f) of the IPC. The accused-appellant pleaded not guilty while the charge was explained to him and claimed to be tried.

6. In this case, to bring home the guilt of the accused-appellant, the prosecution examined as many as 10 witnesses, who are, except PW 3, subjected to cross-examination by the defence.

7. After closure of the prosecution evidence, statement of the accused-appellant was recorded by the learned trial Court, under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. The accused-appellant, in his such statement, denied the accusation levelled against him and also declined to adduce defence evidence. After conclusion of the trial the learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant as aforesaid.

8. I have meticulously examined the judgment appealed against as well as the evidence of 10 witnesses as available on record of the learned trial Court.

9. The evidence of Dr. Jahiruddin Ahmed, PW 1, who examined the victim, PW 2, is that the victim was admitted in the RNB Civil Hospital, Kokrajhar in the Maternity Ward, on 02.01.2008, at about 12.15 p.m. in semi conscious state due to bleeding per vaginal for perineal tear with severe anaemia. She was examined after blood transfusion under general anaesthesia and it was found that the vagina was full of blood clot and after removing the clot, it was seen that there were linear tear on each side of the vaginal wall extending upto the fornix and there was second perineal tear which are repaired with chromic catgut. She was discharged from the hospital on 22.01.2008 after recovery. The