JUDGMENT :

Michael Zothankhuma, J.

1. Heard Mr. A.M. Bora, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant assisted by Mr. D. Talukdar, learned counsel. Also heard Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor assisted by Ms. P. Bora, learned counsel.

2. This appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment dated 24.02.2020 passed by the learned Court of the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Tract Court, Hojai, Sankardev Nagar in Special (POCSO) Case No.13(N)/2018, by which the two appellants, Jahangir Alom and Eliyas Ali have been convicted under Section 376(1) IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life, with a fine of Rs.50,000/-each, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for 6 (six) month, vide sentence order dated 28.02.2020. They would also be debarred from any kind of remission.

3. The prosecution case in brief is that an FIR was submitted on 19.11.2017 by Prosecution Witness No.1 (PW-1) to the Officer-in-Charge, Kaki Police Station, which is to the effect that on 18.11.2017, at around 7 p.m. when his daughter, aged 16 years, went out of the house to ease herself, the appellants gagged her and took her forcibly to the house of the appellant Md. Eliyas Ali, wherein Md. Jahangir Alom raped her. Later on his daughter escaped and thereafter came back to their house. In pursuance to the FIR submitted by PW1, Kaki P.S. Case No.191/2017 under Section 363/376(2)(i) IPC was registered.

The victim girl was thereafter taken for medical examination on 20.11.2017 and her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C was also recorded before the concerned Magistrate on 21.11.2017. After completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted the charge-sheet, wherein he found a prima facie case under Section 366/342/376(2)(G) IPC against the appellants.

4. In the “Form” used by the learned Trial Court for framing charges against the appellants, charges were framed by the learned Trial Court under Section 363-A IPC, Section 376 IPC and under Section 4 of the POCSO Act, to which the appellants pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5. Thereafter 7 (seven) prosecution witnesses were examined by the learned Trial Court. The appellants were thereafter examined by the learned Trial Court under Section 313 Cr.P.C and after hearing the final arguments, the learned Trial Court came to a finding that the prosecution had failed to bring home the offence under Section 363-A IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act against the appellants beyond all reasonable doubt. The learned Trial Court however held that the prosecution could prove the guilt of the appellants under Section 376(1) IPC for committing rape upon the victim girl. Subsequent to the impugned judgment passed by the learned Trial Court on 24.02.2020 convicting the appellants under Section 376(1) IPC, the appellants were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.50,000/-each, in default, simple imprisonment for 6 (six) months.

6. Mr. A.M. Bora, learned Senior Counsel for the appellants submits that the victim girl was 21 years of age at the time of the incident and was having a romantic affair with the appellant Jahangir Alom. He submits that though it is proved that the appellant Jahangir Alom had committed rape upon the victim girl, the harsh sentence imposed upon the said Jahangir Alom should be reduced to the minimum sentence possible provided in Section 376(1) IPC, as Jahangir Alom and the victim girl were involved in a romantic relationship. The learned Senior Counsel also submits that the fact that there was a romantic relationship between the victim girl and the appellant Jahangir Alom is proved by the evidence given by PW-4 (mother of the victim girl) in her cross-examination and the evidence given by PW-6 (uncle of the victim girl) in his cross-examination. The learned Senior Counsel also submits that the statement made by the victim girl under Section 164 Cr.P.C was not exhibited by the prosecution during the evidence. He submit