The Calcutta High Court ruled that FIR is not an encyclopedia, courts must not be scrupulous about omissions in the FIR.
The appellant used to come to the house of the victim for the last 7/8 years and the appellant used to call the victim as “grand-daughter”. Taking advantage of the absence of other family members namely brother, father and grand-mother of the victim girl, the appellant trespassed into the house of the victim and forcibly committed rape on her repeatedly on different occasions for the last 6-7 months. On the basis of the aforesaid complaint dated 10.06.2014, lodged by the victim herself, Goalpokher under Section 376(2)(i) of IPC and Section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, was initiated against the appellant.
Advocate Chatterjee, appearing on behalf of the appellant, contended that the grand-mother of the victim girl who has been examined on behalf of the defense is also resident of the same household and she deposed that some other boy used to come to their house to meet the victim girl and has impregnated the victim, which aspect makes the prosecution case against the appellant suspicious and unacceptable.
Panda, Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the State argued that evidence of victim girl is very much consistent with regard to the fact that the appellant is the sole perpetrator of crime of penetrative sexual assault upon the victim girl.
The division bench of Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Bivas Pattanayak found that there was repeated sexual assault upon the victim by the appellant resulting in her pregnancy, which is an aggravating circumstance. Thus keeping in mind the entire gamut of circumstances, a term of 14 years of rigorous imprisonment will be commensurate with the nature of offense.
The court reduced the sentence for rigorous imprisonment for life imposed in respect of Section 6 of POCSO Act, 2012, to rigorous imprisonment for a term of 14 years and maintained the sentence of fine together with default clause as imposed by the trial court.
The court stated that crime against women is increasing as a whole. Such type of crime is a direct insult to the human dignity of the society and therefore imposition of any inadequate sentence not only results in injustice to the victim and the society in general but also stimulates criminal activities.
Case title: Md. Israil v/s The State of West Bengal
Citation: CRAN 2 of 2021