Back
T. AMARNATH GOUD, ARINDAM LODH
Pranab Datta @ Bapan – Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura – Respondent
JUDGMENT
T. Amarnath Goud, J. - This instant appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure challenging the judgment and order of conviction dated 01.09.2020. The accused-appellant herein was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7(seven) years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for six months, for an offence punishable under Section 366 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , and also sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month, for an offence punishable under Section 343 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , and further sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10(ten) years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year for committing offence punishable under Section 376(2)(i) of the INDIAN PENAL CODE on 03.09.2020 passed in Special 16(POCSO) of 2019 by the learned Special Judge, South Tripura, Belonia.
2. The facts of the case in brief, which may be relevant for the present purpose and manifest on the record are that on 16.12.2018, a written complaint was lodged by one Smt. Mina Karmakar of
The prosecution must establish the victim's minor status and consent beyond reasonable doubt; discrepancies in evidence can lead to acquittal.
Consent of a minor is immaterial in sexual assault cases; the accused's marriage does not justify the offense, affirming protective laws against child exploitation.
The court emphasized that the prosecution must prove the victim’s age beyond a reasonable doubt to establish the charge of rape, which was not satisfied in this case.
The prosecution must establish a defendant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt; inconsistencies in victim testimony cannot support conviction.
Consistent victim testimony and supporting age documentation suffices for conviction under sexual offences, affirming the trial court's judgment when no contradictions exist.
Elopement of minor girl under 18 does not negate kidnapping from lawful guardianship under Section 363 IPC, as her consent is inconsequential without guardian's approval; POCSO conviction under Secti....
Prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt; inconsistencies in victim's testimony and lack of corroboration led to acquittal.
Conviction under POCSO Act confirmed based on credible testimonies and medical evidence, demonstrating guilt despite challenges to the prosecution's credibility.
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt; significant inconsistencies in witness testimonies led the court to find in favor of the accused.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
