JUDGMENT D. P. Sood, J. —This appeal by State of Himachal Pradesh is directed against the judgment of Additional Sessions Judge, Shimla (Shri A.L. Vaidya as he then was) acquitting respondent Dharam Dass for the alleged commission of the offence under sections 363, 366 and 376, Indian Penal Code. 2. The prosecution case, in nutshell, is that Kumari Satya, aged fifteen years, a minor, was being looked-after by her brother Shri Sant Ram (PW 2), he being her natural guardian because of the death of her parents much earlier to the occurrence. Smt Devku was the mother-in-law of said Sant Ram (PW 2) and she was also being looked-after by the latter On December 3, 1980, the prosecutrix had visited and also stayed for the night with said Smt. Devku at the behest of her brother Sant Ram (PW 2) On the following morning, i. e. on 4-12-1980 at about 9.00 a m., she left her brothers house located at village Cheri, Pargana Pagogi, Police Station, Dhalli. As per the prosecution, the accused had once visited the house of PW Sant Ram two years back in connection with some marriage and thereafter, he was on visiting terms with the prosecutrix. Earlier, he had been proposing Kumari Satya, prosecutrix to marry him to which proposal she did not accede On the fateful day, the accused allegedly kidnapped Kumari Satya by alluring her to marry him and also promised to provide her with better clothings and better amenities of life. 3. It is further alleged that accused Dharam Dass also told her (PW 1) that her brother was proposing to marry her somewhere else in lieu of receipt of consideration Thus, the prosecutrix is alleged to have fallen into the trap of the accused, who brought her straightway to Shimla. At that place he took her to District Courts where she also appended her thumb impression to an affidavit in token of having married the accused. Thereafter, Dharam Dass accused aforesaid brought her to the residence of one Shri Mali and kept her in that house alongwith him. The later on, he took her to his house located in village Karialtoo where she was apprised of the fact that she had been married to him in the Court and that both of them can live as husband and wife. 4. The later on, he took her to his house located in village Karialtoo where she was apprised of the fact that she had been married to him in the Court and that both of them can live as husband and wife. 4. As per the First Information Report lodged by her, she did not sleep for the first three nights alongwith the accused despite the latters having attempted to compel her, but subsequently, she did sleep with the accused and committed sexual intercourse for the next three nights; that on December 11, 1980, she felt home-sick and as such ran away from the house of the accused and returned to her home and narrated the entire incident to her brother Sant Ram (PW 2). 5. Report having been lodged on 13-12-1980 by the prosecutrix herself in Police Station Dhalli, a criminal case for the commission of the aforesaid offences was registered. The Investigating Officer completed the codal formalities and arrested the accused on 14-12-1980. During investigation, the prosecutrix as well as the accused were medically examined by Dr. Mrs. Savita (PW 8) and Dr. M. M. Auand respectively. PW 8 opined that Satya prosecutrix (PW 1) was used to sexual intercourse. The clinical age on her medical examination, was opined by Lady Dr Suman Gupta (PW 9). The Police also recovered the wearing apparels of the prosecutrix allegedly at the instance of the accused. On the basis of the investigation it was revealed that the prosecutrix Kumari Satya (PW 1) was aged fifteen years on the date of occurrence Accordingly, the accused was prosecuted and acquitted ultimately for the commission of the offences as indicated above. 6. The accused abjured the guilt and pleaded false implication, inasmuch as, Sant Ram (PW 2), the brother of the prosecutrix,, was demanding money from him for the marriage of his sister with him and as he could not pay the requisite amount, therefore, the instant case was got registered against him. 7. The prosecution in order to bring home the charge against the accused beyond reasonable doubt, produced fifteen witnesses. The accused did not lead any defence. 8. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, after considering the evidence adduced in the case, concluded that there was no trustworthy evidence brought on record to base the conclusion that the prosecutrix was under sixteen years of age on the date of commission of the offence. The accused did not lead any defence. 8. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, after considering the evidence adduced in the case, concluded that there was no trustworthy evidence brought on record to base the conclusion that the prosecutrix was under sixteen years of age on the date of commission of the offence. On the contrary, from an appraisal of all the circumstances, the possibility of her being more than eighteen years could not be ruled out at all. Further, it was found that the prosecutrix was a consenting party to the commission of the sexual intercourse Accordingly, the accused was acquitted 9. Shri M.L. Chauhan, learned Assistant Advocate General, appearing on behalf of the State, has assailed the impugned judgment on two counts ; firstly, that the finding of the Court below regarding the age of the prosecutrix is based on flimsy reasonings, contrary to the record, particularly birth entries recorded in the Birth Register maintained in the Panchayat concerned as also the School Admission Register ; and secondly, that it has amply been proved that Satya prosecutrix (PW 1) was not a consenting party to the commission of sexual intercourse, but on the contrary as per evidence adduced by the prosecution, she has been proved to be the victim of allurements which she fully accepted because of her tender age. 10. The crucial consideration is the question regarding the fact as to whether Satya Devi, prosecutrix (PW 1) was or was not below sixteen years of age at the material time. The prosecution has produced oral as well as documentary evidence in this respect. The oral evidence constitutes of the statements of PWs I and 2, whereas the documentary evidence recorded in this behalf consists of copy of the Birth Register (Ext. PP) coupled with copy of the admission form of the prosecutrix filled at the time of her entry into the School (Ext. PM), besides, the copy of School Register (Ext. PN). The other documents are the medical certificate issued by the two Medical Experts PWs 8 and 9 respectively which also reveal her clinical age. 11. PP) coupled with copy of the admission form of the prosecutrix filled at the time of her entry into the School (Ext. PM), besides, the copy of School Register (Ext. PN). The other documents are the medical certificate issued by the two Medical Experts PWs 8 and 9 respectively which also reveal her clinical age. 11. It is well established that the prosecution has to prove the guilt against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt and that too by leading independent, reliable and unimpeachable evidence There is no controversy to the proposition that the accused is entitled to the benefit of every doubt occurring in the prosecution case. 12. The first important piece of evidence on the age of Satya Devi is her own deposition before the Court which is of general character. She has not been able to state about the date, month or year of the date of birth of her brother and sister. She has categorically admitted that she has one sister, four or five years elder to her, besides, an elder brother. Even, she has not given the age of either one of them. To similar effect is the statement of her elder brother Sant Ram (PW 2). In his cross-examination, he has given his age to be twenty-four years and further stated that PW I, Satya Devi, prosecutrix to be eight years younger to him. The statements of both PWs 1 and 2 were recorded on 2-7-1982. It is to be noted that the prosecutrix has stated her age to be seventeen years Even, this statement of PW 2 does not tally with the factum of age of the prosecutrix deposed by her. Thus, no reliance can be placed upon the statements of PWs 1 and 2 as to the age of the former, unless some other corroborative evidence is proved to be in existence on the record by the prosecution. Thus, the oral evidence is of no avail to the prosecution. 13. The next piece of evidence consists of the starred document Ext. PP, the copy of birth entry. The said document reveals that a daughter was born to Sbobnu and her date of birth, as recorded, is shown to be October 20, 1965. The author of the said entry is recorded as "self" (SAVA1N). 14. 13. The next piece of evidence consists of the starred document Ext. PP, the copy of birth entry. The said document reveals that a daughter was born to Sbobnu and her date of birth, as recorded, is shown to be October 20, 1965. The author of the said entry is recorded as "self" (SAVA1N). 14. PW 11 Shri Lekh Ram, Secretary of Gram Panchayat, Dhalli has proved the said document which is admissible in evidence under section 35 of the Evidence Act, in case the original Birth Register is proved to have been maintained during the course of official business and that too in a proper and regular manner. Original register reveals the aforesaid entry regarding the date of birth of the prosecutrix at page 43, copy of which is Ext. PP on record. PW 11 has admitted that he is not the author of the said entry ; that there is an over-writing on the figure "65" and also regarding the other irregularities and illegalities committed in maintaining of this register, inasmuch as, that four entries pertaining to the birth of children of S/Shri Ram Krishan and Mast Ram exist prior to this entry and that the date of birth of said children stands recorded as 25-3-1971/27-3-1971 and 12-4-1971/13-4-197P respectively. In other words, the entries in the Birth Register by itself indicate that the entries so recorded have not at all been maintained in the discharge of regular course of official duties by its authors. Admittedly, the prosecutrix was born in the year 1965 and as per serialwise and year-wise entries, this entry should have been much prior to the entry with respect to the date of birth of the children of S/Shri Ram Krishan and Mast Ram aforesaid. Thus, the facts and circumstances, when closely perused, reflect that entry in dispute was made after the year 1971 positively. Such a lapse on the part of the person making entries in the Birth and Death Register, gives rise to an adverse inference to be drawn regarding its credibility under the law. 15. Secondly, even otherwise, the prosecution has not produced or proved on record the birth entries of other two issues of Shobnu in that matter as well. In the absence of any reliable evidence, this entry Ext PP cannot, in any manner, be held to be connected with the prosecutrix. 16. 15. Secondly, even otherwise, the prosecution has not produced or proved on record the birth entries of other two issues of Shobnu in that matter as well. In the absence of any reliable evidence, this entry Ext PP cannot, in any manner, be held to be connected with the prosecutrix. 16. Another suspicious circumstance which the disputed entry in the Birth Register gives rise to, is as to who was the author of the said entry. Was it the father of the prosecutrix or someone else ? There is no dispute that father had died during the childhood of the prosecutrix. Further, who gave the information to the custodian of the record, whether Ctaawkidar or Secretary of the Gram Panchayat regarding the birth of the prosecutrix, is also not decipherable from the evidence. There is also no other evidence o show whether the author effecting the entry in the said register is dead or alive. Thus, the result is that one does not know who was the author, when this entry was made, when no date has been reflected in the concerned column. Thus, no weight can be attached to the said entry in view of this legal lacuna. 17. S. I. Milap Singh (PW 15), was the Investigating Officer at the material time. The disputed entry vide Ext PP was procured by him during investigation on 11-6-1981 after a lapse of more than six months of the occurrence In his statement, he has explained that the Secretary, Panchayat, Dhalli was on leave and was not available. No such fact is revealed by the case diary nor this fact is stated by PW 1 nor the Investigating Officer has even cared to produce the previous and subsequent entries to the entry in dispute which could have positively shown unbias investigation on his part. In the circumstances, the learned trial Court was absolutely right in having observed that the factum of procuring the aforesaid cony of the birth entry pertaining to the prosecutrix after a lapse of six months of the occurrence, does not rule out the possibility of the entry having been maneuvered or at least made afterwards in the register. In any case, it does raise a doubt of which benefit should be given to the accused. 18. Regarding the entries in the admission form (Ext. In any case, it does raise a doubt of which benefit should be given to the accused. 18. Regarding the entries in the admission form (Ext. PM) and that of the School Register (Ext PN), suffice it to say that we are in full agreement with the reasonings given by the trial Court. Admittedly, the prosecutrix was admitted in the school on April 9, 1973 and date of birth therein has also been specified to be October 20, 1965. She is stated to have been admitted by her mother who was illiterate It appears that the date of birth of the prosecutrix was given on the basis of the entry in the Birth Register which by itself and in view of the reasons given above, had become unworthy of credence, as such, this evidence is also of no help to the prosecution. 19. Regarding the medical evidence, suffice it to say that lady Dr. Suman Gupta (PW 9) has given her (prosecutrix) clinical age to be fifteen to sixteen and a half years as per the chart regarding variation prepared by Professor M. L. Aggarwal instead that of Modi. She has categorically admitted that climate of a particular place does effect the fusion of the bones and in colder region, the said process is generally late. There is no dispute that the prosecutrix belongs to village Cheri, Pargana Pagogi, Tehsil and District Shimla which is located at a height of more than five thousand feet from the sea level. The chart prepared by Professor M. L Aggarwal does not specifically show that it pertains to the fusion of bones of persons belonging to colder region. Why and under what circumstances the chart given by Modi pertaining to the variations of age has not been followed, also remains unexplained. From whatever angle the medical evidence is viewed, it does not rule out the possibility of the prosecutrix being more than eighteen years and the conclusion so arrived at by the trial Court appears to be well reasoned. 20. The next question is with respect to the fact whether the prosecutrix was a consenting party ? In this regard, her own statement on oath before the Court that she did not disclose to anyone that she had been kidnapped or abducted forcibly by the accused, is an important factor to support the conclusion of the learned trial Court. 20. The next question is with respect to the fact whether the prosecutrix was a consenting party ? In this regard, her own statement on oath before the Court that she did not disclose to anyone that she had been kidnapped or abducted forcibly by the accused, is an important factor to support the conclusion of the learned trial Court. She accompanied the accused to the District Courts at Shimla and then Chhota-Shimla to the house of one Mali where she resided with the accused and then accompanied him to his village Karial too and in all stayed for a period of more than a week, i e. from December 4, 1980 till December 11, 1980 when she states to have returned to her home. There is no iota of evidence on record to show that the accused had ever threatened her with dire consequentes in case she disclosed the factum of kidnapping or abduction or commission of the sexual intercourse without her consent. It does not appear to reason that had she not voluntarily accompanied the accused, submitted to his lust of sex indulgence, she would have definitely raised hue and cry on the way and must have disclosed the facts to various persons she met, particularly the attesting witnesses of the affidavit bearing her thumb impression which was executed with the help of a Lawyer Shri Liakat Ali (PW 3). All the facts taken together lead to no other conclusion except the one that she was a consenting party. We are fully in agreement with the conclusion so arrived at by the learned trial Court. 21. In view of the above, the appeal is dismissed, impugned judgment is up-held. Appeal dismissed.