JUDGMENT : Mohapatra, J. - The Petitioner Lala Sahu aged about 22 stands convicted u/s 376 of the Indian Penal Code, and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 50/- in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a month more. 2. The prosecution story is that the girl Gurubari Kultani aged about 17 or 18, who is fully matured and grown up, on 2-6-54 at about 8 a.m. had been to the fields taking gruel for the brothers who were working in the sugar-cane fields. On her return she was passing by the village path-way on one side of which is the Bari of the accused which is surrounded by a mud-wall of waist high when the accused immediately caught hold of her but as she struggled the accused lifted her bodily, took her inside the Bari and placed her on a heap of hay and had sexual inter-course with her without her consent. This occurrence, according to the story of the prosecutrix, was witnessed by two witnesses P. W. 2 a boy of 12 and P. W. 8 a boy of 15. She thereafter returned from the Bari crying and abusing the accused and told the incident to her father. The father in the first instance took the girl to the father of the accused with the proposal that the accused should marry her. The father of the accused brushed aside the question of marriage, but nevertheless assured him to take severe steps against his son. Thereafter in the evening there was a Punchayati and subsequently First Information Report was lodged by the prosecution (P. W. 1) Gurubari on 3-6-54 at 10 a.m., the police station being at a distance of 9 miles. 3. Both the complainant and the accused were examined by two doctors (p. Ws. 4 and 5). The complainant was medically examined on 4-6-54 at about 1 p.m. by P. W. 5, and the accused was examined on 5.6-54 at 10. a.m. by P. W. 4. The doctor (P. W. 4) did not find any injury on the person of the accused whatsoever, and the doctor (p. W. 5), who examined the girl, did not find any external injuries or marks of violence on the -private parts nor any injury on any other parts of the body. a.m. by P. W. 4. The doctor (P. W. 4) did not find any injury on the person of the accused whatsoever, and the doctor (p. W. 5), who examined the girl, did not find any external injuries or marks of violence on the -private parts nor any injury on any other parts of the body. He however found that the hymen had been torn, it was red, swollen and moderately painful the fourchetta and posterior commissure had been moderately lacerated and bleeding. 4. The plea of the accused before the Sessions Court was to the effect that in fact he had sexual inter-course with the girl but nevertheless with her consent as he was in intimacy with her for sometime past. 5. Both the courts below have accepted the prosecution case as proved by the testimony of three witnesses P. WS. 1, 2 and 8, as corroborated by the evidence of P. Ws. 10 and. 11 and have convicted the accused u/s 376, I.P.C so this present revision. 6. Indeed the accused admits that he had sexual intercourse with the girl. The pertinent question therefore that arises for determination is whether in the circumstances transpiring in the case and from the evidence adduced On behalf of the prosecution can it be said that it had been established by the prosecution that the intercourse was against her will or without her consent as required under the provisions of Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code. The admitted and pertinent circumstances are that the girl is aged 17 or 18. The doctor says that she is fully matured. The accused is aged 22. It is indeed a very important piece of circumstance that the accused had suffered absolutely no injury on his person. It is highly improbable, if not almost impossible, that with this fully matured girl the accused, aged 22 would have intercourse against her resistance and without her consent without suffering quite a number of injuries on his own person. The position gains much strength on account of another important feature that the girl also had suffered no external injury on her private parts and no injury on any other parts of her body. In such cases, generally we would be expecting that while she was resisting, she would be biting, scratching and beating the assailant. There was none of these acts in the present case. 7. In such cases, generally we would be expecting that while she was resisting, she would be biting, scratching and beating the assailant. There was none of these acts in the present case. 7. We will now take up the oral evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution. It is to be observed at the outset that the Investigating Officer while recording statements u/s 162 Code Criminal Procedure, had administered oath to these witnesses and had obtained their signature below their statements. Indeed this alone is not sufficient to vitiate the entire trial nor does it make the evidence of the witnesses inadmissible. But this is certainly a very improper practice which has got to be strongly deprecated and the value of the evidence of the witnesses is also greatly impaired. The most important witnesses, according to the Courts below, are P. Ws. 2 and 8. P. W. 2 is a child witness aged 12. It is the settled law that the evidence of such a child witness is always to be taken with great care and can be accepted if it stands scrutiny. It is very unfortunate that neither of the Courts below took cognizance of this position of law while assessing the value of the evidence of this witness. Furthermore after a careful perusal of the evidence of this witness we see that he has made a statement to the effect that the complainant did not shout for help while she was being dragged or carried. Moreover he has made several inconsistent statements at different stages. Before the Sessions Court he states that previous illicit connextion between the accused and the prosecutrix was habitual. The prosecution relied upon be more feature to prove that the acts of the accused was without her consent, that is, while the accused made attempt to have intercourse with her after she had been made to lie down, she gave two kicks to the accused. This witness did not make any such statement which was recorded under the provisions of Section 164 Code of Criminal Procedure P. W. 8, as I have already mentioned, is not much older than the previous witness. This witness did not make any such statement which was recorded under the provisions of Section 164 Code of Criminal Procedure P. W. 8, as I have already mentioned, is not much older than the previous witness. There is one significant feature, which will shake the value of the evidence of this witness, but nevertheless which has not been taken cognizance of by either of that Courts below, is that his name did not appear in the First Information Report. He does not belong to the village of the complainant and the accused. He does not state before the Committing Court that she was crying while the accused was dragging her or carrying her away inside his Bari. It is curious that even though this witness is an eye witness to the occurrence and poses to know that the act of intercourse was without her consent he did not speak about this to any one in the Village nor even in the Punchayati which was held in that evening. The evidence of the other two witnesses (P. Ws. 10 and 11) would rather support to a great extent the plea of the accused 'that the intercourse was with her consent. Both of them are witnesses only to the part of the prosecution story while the girl was being dragged from the village path-way inside the Bari. They say that she did not sought, did not cry nor even did she struggle. The evidence is quit consent with the case of the accused. The doctor's evidence is not inconsi consent with the intercourse being with the consent of the girl. Regarding the hymen having been torn and the injuries on fourchetta and posterior commissure the opines: It may be that if a women struggles in course of the intercourse, when she sees certain persons at the time she may have the injuries like 'those found on the genetalia of this girl." We may in this connexion further observe that all the assessors unanimously found the accused to be not guilty. 8. In the above circumstances, therefore, we are definitely of the view that the prosecution has not been able to establish that the sexual intercourse was against the will of the girl Gurubari or without her consent. The accused, therefore, is entitled to all acquittal. The Criminal revision is therefore allowed. The rule is made absolute. 8. In the above circumstances, therefore, we are definitely of the view that the prosecution has not been able to establish that the sexual intercourse was against the will of the girl Gurubari or without her consent. The accused, therefore, is entitled to all acquittal. The Criminal revision is therefore allowed. The rule is made absolute. The accused is acquitted and the accused is to be set at liberty forthwith. Rao, J. 9. I agree. 10. Revision allowed. Final Result : Allowed