JUDGMENT :

Arindam Lodh, J.

1. The appellant, by means of filing the present appeal, has challenged the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 14.01.2019 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, South Tripura, Belonia in connection with case No. S.T. (ST/S) 40 of 2016 wherein the appellant has been convicted under Section 376(1) of the IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10(ten) years and to pay a fine of Rs. 30,000/- with default stipulation and also to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 1(one) year for the commission of offence punishable under Section 417 of the IPC and, both the sentences shall run concurrently.

2. Heard Mr. P.K. Biswas, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. P. Majumder, learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as Mr. S. Ghosh, learned Additional PP appearing for the respondent.

3. The prosecution case, briefly stated, is that one complaint was lodged by Smt. Sandhya Das stating inter alia that on 01.03.2007 her adjacent neighbor, Suman Malakar i.e. the appellant herein, in her absence came to her house and after giving assurance of marriage induced the victim (name withheld) to develop physical relation and when her daughter did not agree, the appellant gave one ring and thereafter forcibly committed rape upon her and thereafter the appellant told her not to disclose the incident to anybody as otherwise threatened her to kill her mother and brother and also to set fire in her house. It was further alleged that thereafter the appellant in absence of the complainant committed rape upon her daughter on several times and when the menstruation of her daughter was stopped, on persuasion, her daughter disclosed the incident to her and on asking the appellant, he admitted the fact and told that he will marry her daughter and not to disclose the fact to anybody as otherwise she will face the consequence. The matter was brought to the knowledge of the parents of the appellant and thereafter the complainant approached the local panchayat. It was also alleged that she brought her daughter to the doctor, who told that her daughter is pregnant. Thereafter, the complainant approached the Panchayat with the said report but, in the mean time, the parents of the appellant sent him to Delhi.

4. On receipt of the complaint (Exhibit-6), the Officer-in-Charge of Sabroom police station had registered a case against the appellant under FIR No. 24 of 2007 under Section 376/493/109 of the IPC. Being endorsed, the investigating officer visited the place of occurrence, recorded the statement of the available witnesses including the victim (PW-1) and arranged for her medical treatment. The investigating officer collected one panchayat resolution and the medical examination report of the victim and also seized one finger ring along with some documents along with birth certificate of the victim. The investigating officer also had arranged for examination of the victim under Section 164(5) Cr.P.C. and her statement was accordingly recorded by the SDJM, Sabroom. After completion of investigation, the investigating officer submitted charge-sheet against the appellant showing him as absconder.

5. Being committed, the learned Sessions Judge, South Tripura, Belonia had framed charge against the appellant under Section 376(2)(n)/417 of the IPC, to which the appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. To substantiate the charges, the prosecution had examined 10 witnesses and introduced some documents including medical examination report of the victim (Exhibit-10). After completion of recording of prosecution evidences, the appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. where he repeated the plea of his innocence. After hearing argument of both the parties, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellant under sections 376(1)/417 IPC and sentenced him as aforestated. Hence, the appellant has preferred this appeal.

7. Mr. Biswas, learned Sr. counsel appearing for the appellant has contended that the