Shri Rifu Tripura vs The State Of Tripura
2021 Latest Caselaw 1140 Tri

                      THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                            AGARTALA


                           CRL A 4 OF 2019

Shri Rifu Tripura,
S/o Late Aro Kumar Tripura of Krishnanagar,
P.S. Belonia, Dist. South Tripura.
                                                            .... Appellant
            - Vs -

The State of Tripura
                                                          ....Respondent

BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH

For the appellant : Mr. S.B.Deb,Advocate.

For the State-respondent     : Mr. S. Debnath,
                               Additional Public Prosecutor.

Date of hearing and          : 22.11.2021
date of delivery of
Judgment & Order

Whether fit for reporting : No

                       Judgment & Order (Oral)

Heard Mr. S.B.Deb, learned counsel appearing for the

appellant. Also heard Mr. S. Debnath, learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the

State-respondent.

2. This is an appeal against the judgment and order of conviction

and sentence dated 29.01.2019 passed by learned Special Judge, South Page 2

Tripura, Belonia, in connection with case No. Special 17(POCSO) of 2016

whereby and whereunder the convict-appellant was sentenced to suffer R.I.

for 3(three) months for commission of offence punishable under Section

451 of IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- with default stipulation and

further R.I. for 3 (three) years for commission of offence punishable under

Section 354B of IPC as the highest punishment is under Section 354B than

that of Section 18 of POCSO Act for attempt to commit the offence

punishable under Section 8 of POCSO Act and also to pay a fine of

Rs.1,000/- only with default stipulation.

3. Briefly stated, one Niranjan Tripura, the father (PW-2) of the

victim (PW-1) had lodged an FIR to the O.C., Women P.S., Belonia, South

Tripura on 27.04.2016 stating inter alia that on that day his 11 years old

daughter was alone in the house at 9:00 am. At that time, the appellant [22

years old], a resident of the same village forcefully had entered into his

dwelling hut and started removing the wearing apparels of his minor

daughter, the victim herein, and had molested her. Hearing his daughter's

cry, his second daughter had arrived at the place of occurrence when the

appellant had fled away.

4. On the basis of the said complaint, the incident was

investigated by the police and being found prima facie case, submitted Page 3

charge-sheet. The competent court had taken cognizance of the police

report. Learned Special Judge had commenced trial after framing charge

against the appellant under Sections 451/354B of IPC and Section 8 of the

POCSO Act.

5. To substantiate the charges, the prosecution had examined as

many as 7 witnesses including the victim and introduced those documents

including the birth certificate of the victim girl as well as her statement

recorded under Section 164(5) of CrPC. On conclusion of trial, the

accused-appellant was examined under Section 313 CrPC wherein he stated

that he had been falsely implicated with the case and claimed to be

innocent.

6. Having heard the arguments of the learned counsels appearing

for the parties, the learned Special Judge found the appellant guilty of

committing offence and convicted and sentenced him to suffer

imprisonment as aforestated.

7. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said judgment

and order of conviction and sentence, the appellant has preferred the instant

appeal.

8. Mr. Deb, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has

submitted that there are enough discrepancies in the statements of the Page 4

witnesses including the statements of the victim girl and these

discrepancies are sufficient to set aside the judgment and order of

conviction and sentence passed by the learned Special Judge. Mr. Deb,

learned counsel has further submitted that the incident had occurred at 9:00

am but none of the neighbouring people had heard the cry of the victim

girl. Learned counsel has further argued that there was delay in lodging the

FIR as the incident had occurred at 9:00 am, but, the ejahar was lodged at

3:45 pm. According to Mr. Deb, learned counsel, this delay is vital for

prosecution.

9. On the other hand, Mr. S. Debnath, learned Addl. P.P. has

submitted that there is no discrepancy in the statements of the prosecution

witnesses. Mr. Debnath, learned Addl. P.P. has further submitted that

considering the nature of the case there was absolutely no delay in lodging

the FIR and learned Special Judge had appreciated the evidences of the

prosecution witnesses in their correct perspective. He has prayed for

affirming the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by

learned Special Judge.

10. I have considered the rival submissions of the learned counsels

appearing for the parties and also perused the statements of the prosecution

witnesses and other material evidences on record.

Page 5

11. PW-1, the victim in her evidence has categorically stated that

on 27.04.2016, at about 9/9:30 am, she was watching TV and none of her

father, mother were present in the house. Her sister was outside the house

to fetch water. At that time, the appellant had entered in her room and

removed her panty. She raised alarm and at that event, her sister had

arrived at the scene of occurrence. Seeing her sister, the appellant had left

the place. The appellant hails from the same village. She further deposed

that she had given statements to a Judicial Magistrate [PW-6] on

28.04.2016.

12. PW-2, Niranjan Tripura, the father of the victim deposed that

on that fateful day he went outside for work. His wife was at Anganwadi

School where she works as a cook. His two daughters were at home. At

around 12:30 his nephew Samir asked him to return home and accordingly,

he returned home at around 1:00 pm when his wife informed the entire

episode to him. PW-2 further deposed that his another daughter [PW-4]

also reported the incident to him. He reported the matter to the elected

member, Sefali Tripura and another Bimal Tripura. Thereafter he reported

the incident in writing to the police.

13. PW-3, Smt. Rekha Rani Tripura, the mother of the victim girl

deposed that on 27.04.2016 in the morning she went to cook to a Page 6

Anganwadi Centre situated at a distance of more than half km. Her two

daughters were in the house while her husband went outside for his day to

day work. One of his daughters went to fetch drinking water and the

appellant being found her victim daughter alone entered into the room and

removed her panty. She returned to home at about 11:30 am and found her

victim daughter weeping. Being asked the victim daughter narrated the

entire incident to her. She was also reported the said incident by her

another daughter. She informed the matter to her husband on his return to

house. Her husband had lodged the FIR. She had handed over the birth

certificate to the investigating officer which was seized by preparing a

seizure list. She identified her signature (Exbt.3) in the seizure list. The

birth certificate was issued by the District Registrar (Birth and Death),

Belonia, South Tripura [Exbt.4].

14. PW-4, Kumari Uma Bharati Tripura happened to be the sister

of the victim girl. She deposed that on 27.04.2016, at about 9:00 am, she

went to fetch drinking water. While she approached near her house, she

heard her victim sister was raising alarm. She entered into their living hut

and found the appellant, their neighbour, caught hold of the hand of her

victim sister and the panty of the victim was lying on the ground. Seeing

her, the appellant had fled away. After sometime, her mother had returned

to home when they narrated the incident to her mother. The said incident Page 7

was also informed to their father [PW-2] who lodged the FIR. She further

deposed that her statement was recorded by a Judicial Magistrate at

Belonia. Her signature in the said statement was marked as Exbt.5. She

further deposed that birth certificate of her sister was seized by police

where she put her signature. Being identified, her signature was marked as

Exbt.3/1.

15. PW-5, Smt. Shefali Tripura deposed that two years back one

day, Rekha Tripura of their village informed her over telephone that the

appellant had outraged modesty of her younger daughter.

16. PW-6, Smt. Nandita Bhattacharjee, the Judicial Magistrate

deposed that she recorded the statements of victim girl and another Smt.

Uma Bharati Tripura. PW-6 deposed that during examination, the victim

stated that in the morning she had been watching TV in her living room

alone as her elder sister went to fetch drinking water, then, the appellant

entered into her hut and caught hold of her hands. The appellant also

removed the panty of the victim. The victim raised alarm, her elder sister

had rushed hearing on her alarm and thereafter the appellant had fled away.

PW-6 identified her signature on the recorded statement as Exbt.1/2. She

has further stated that on the same day Smt. Uma Bharati Tripura [PW-4]

also was examined by her.

Page 8

17. PW-7 is the investigating officer. Being endorsed she started

investigation. During investigation, she recorded the statements of the

victim and other witnesses. She seized the birth certificate and identified

the same in the seizure list. She further deposed that she had arranged

examination of the victim girl as well as her sister [PW-4] by a Judicial

Magistrate.

18. I have carefully scrutinized the evidences recorded during

trial. In my opinion, there is no discrepancy in the statements of the

prosecution witnesses. The victim [PW-1] very categorically described the

incident. She deposed that while she was alone in the hut and watching TV,

the appellant had entered into the room and caught hold of her hand. The

appellant also removed her panty. She raised alarm. Her sister [PW-4] who

went to fetch water was approaching the house. After hearing her shouting,

she entered into the room when the appellant had fled away from the scene

of occurrence. None of the parents were present at that time. The mother

went for cooking in an Anganwadi Centre and the father of the victim girl

went outside for his day to day work. The incident occurred at about 9/9:30

am. The mother of the victim returned to house at about 11:30 am when the

incident was narrated to her by the victim as well as her sister, PW-4. At

about 1:00 pm, the father [PW-2] returned to home. He was informed by

the mother of the victim. Thereafter, both the victim girl as well as her Page 9

sister had narrated the incident to the father. The matter was informed to

the police station by the father and FIR was lodged. The matter was

investigated. On the very next day, both the victim girl and the sister were

produced before the Judicial Magistrate, Belonia. Both of them were

examined. Their statements were recorded under Section 164(5) of CrPC.

19. On conspectus reading of the evidence on record, I find no

inconsistencies in the statements of the prosecution witnesses. The

statements of the prosecution witnesses including PW-1 (victim) and PW-4

(sister of the victim) inspire confidence of the court. The prosecution

witnesses appear to be very credible and trustworthy.

20. In view of this, I find no reason to interfere with the judgment

and order of conviction and sentence passed by learned Special Judge,

South Tripura, Belonia and accordingly, the same stand affirmed.

21. It is informed that the accused-appellant Sri Rifu Tripura is on

bail. His bail bond is cancelled. In view of this judgment and order, I direct

the appellant to surrender before the learned Special Judge, South Tripura,

Belonia within a period of seven days from today. It is made clear that if

the appellant Rifu Tripura does not surrender before the court within the

stipulated period, then, the learned Special Judge shall proceed in Page 10

accordance with law. The period of imprisonment he suffered after his

arrest or during trial shall be set off.

The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Send back the LCRs forthwith.

JUDGE