The testimony of the prosecutrix in sexual offense cases requires cautious scrutiny, and conviction cannot be based solely on suspect testimonies without corroborative evidence.

1. This appeal is preferred by two accused persons, namely, Chandan Muhuri and Rakhal Biswas, against the judgment and order dated 28-6-2003 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Belonia, South Tripura in S.T. case No. 21 (ST / B) / 2002 convicting the appellant Chandan under S.376(1) and S.457 IPC and sentencing him to suffer R. I. for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default to suffer further R. I. for one year under S.376(1) IPC and to suffer R. I. for one year under S.457 IPC, and also convicting the appellant Rakhal under S.109 read with S.376(1) and S.342 IPC and sentencing him to suffer R. I. for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default to suffer further R. I. for one year under S.109 read with S.376(1) IPC and also sentencing him to suffer R. I. for one month under S.342 IPC. Sentence of the both the appellants will run concurrently.

2. Heard Mr. S. Sarkar, learned Counsel, for the appellants and Mr. A. Ghosh, learned Addl. P. P. appearing for the respondent State.

3. The prosecution story, in short, is that, on 27-8-2001, the informant, the prosecutrix, a married woman, (P.W.4) lodged a complaint in the Court of the learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Belonia to the effect that on 23-8-2001, at night, at about 11 p.m., while the prosecutrix was sleeping with her husband, (P. W. 5), the accused appellant Chandan came to their house and called her husband to come out for discussion. As the accused Chandan was known to them, the husband of the prosecutrix came out of the hut. Then accused Chandan took him away on the plea of some discussion. The husband of the prosecutrix was taken to a nearby place where the other accused Rakhal was waiting. Then they confined the husband of the prosecutrix by tying his hand with a tree and the accused Rakhal was guarding him. On the other hand, the prosecutrix was waiting for her husband, but she fell asleep. Thereafter, at about 12 p.m. the accused Chandan returned and entered into the said 'dwelling hut where the prosecutrix was sleeping alone without her husband. He gagged her mouth with cloth so that the prosecutrix could not raise her voice, and raped her forcibly. She tried to scuffle with the accused Chandan who then made threat to kill her. As such, she could not raise any alarm for her rescue. On the night of the occurrence, the prosecutrix was pregnant of about three months and the mother in law who was living with them stayed in other place. After commission of rape, the accused Chandan left the house of the prosecutrix. Then the prosecutrix went to the house of her sister - in - law Smt. Shova Das (P. W. 8) and narrated the entire incident and she stayed in the house of P. W. 8. But the husband of the prosecutrix was released at late night at about 4.00 a.m. and he returned home who in the following morning met with his wife in the house of his sister which is situated nearby his house and learnt about the aforesaid incident of rape from his wife. It is stated that as the mother - in - law of the prosecutrix was not at home on the date of occurrence, there was delay in loding the complaint.

4. Upon receipt of the aforesaid complaint, the learned SDJM, Belonia, South Tripura forwarded the same to the Officer In - charge of the Belonia police station for investigation, on the basis of which the Belonia P.S. Case No. 65 of 2001 was registered under S.448/376 IPC against the both the accused.

5. On completion of investigation, the Officer In -