JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Ms Bijita Sarma, learned AmicusCuriae appearing on behalf of the appellant. Also heard Mr B Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State of Assam.

2. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant, Golap Bhuyan, against the Judgment and Order dated 02.02.2018, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dhemaji in connection with Sessions Case No. 111 (DH)/2012, whereby the accused was convicted under Section 366 and 376 (1) IPC and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, Rigorous Imprisonment for one month, for the offence under Section 366 IPC. The accused was also sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, Rigorous Imprisonment for another 1 (one) month for the offence under Section 376 (1) IPC. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

3. The prosecution case in brief is that the informant, Smt Rangili Chutia lodged an FIR before the Officer-In-Charge, Dhemaji Police Station, stating inter alia that her daughter used to stay in the house of her uncle, Pradip Chutia, at Dhemaji Chariali, for the purpose of studying in the school, prior to three months of the incident. On 05.03.2012, at about 12:30 am (at night), the accused knocked the door and when her daughter opened the door, the accused gagged the mouth of her daughter and kidnapped her and took her to the paddy field and committed rape on her. Subsequently, her daughter was also taken to Samarajan, wherein she was kept in the house of one person where the accused also committed rape on her. Subsequently, the informant, mother of the victim, received a phone call from her daughter that she was in Samarajan. Thereafter, on receipt of the information, the victim was recovered from Samarajan with the help of Police.

4. On receipt of the complaint, a case was registered vide Dhemaji PS Case No. 58/2012, under Sections 366/376 IPC and investigation has been commenced. During investigation, the Investigating Officer visited the place of occurrence, recorded the statement of the witnesses. The victim was also sent to the Court for recording her statement under Section 164 CrPC by the Magistrate. She was also medically examined. The wearing apparels of the victim and the accused were seized during investigation and sent to Forensic Science Laboratory, Guwahati, for chemical examination. On receipt of the medical report as well as the report from FSL, charge sheet was submitted against the appellant under Sections 366/376 IPC.

5. During trial, on appearance of the accused appellant, charge was framed under Sections 366/376 (1) IPC, which was read over and explained to the accused, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. To prove the guilt of the accused person, the prosecution examined 12 witnesses and exhibited some documents. On the other hand, the accused appellant did not choose to adduce any evidence in support of his defence. After completion of the trial, the statement of the accused appellant was recorded under Section 313 CrPC, wherein he denied the evidence of the witnesses made against him and pleaded his innocence. However, the accused also stated in his statement recorded under Section 313 CrPC that the victim called him over phone and asked him to come to some place in front of Dhemaji Veterinary Hospital. He also stated that he met with the victim. At that time, she was wearing a skirt with sporting and a stole. He repeatedly asked the victim to return back to her house, but she refused to do so. He also stated that he was a married person having a daughter. In spite of that, she did not leave the place and stayed in the house of his friend at night. On the next day morning, at about 09:30 am, they came to Jethamari Eco-Tourism spot and subsequently to the house of a person at Samarajan, from where, Police recovered them and brought them to the Police Station. After hearing