Judgment R. R. YADAV, J. ( 1 ) THE instant Criminal Jail Appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 6-8- 1986 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Merta in Cr. Case No. 33/85 convicting and sentencing accused Bhawani Giri alias Deo Karan u/ss. 366-A, 376, 377, 324 and 342, I. P. C. The learned Sessions Judge found the accused-appellant guilty of the aforesaid offences and convicted and sentenced him for seducing minor girl aged about 3 years namely Kumari Durga prosecutrix for illicit intercourse committing rape and unnatural offence causing voluntary hurt by his teeth on her cheeks and wrongfully confining her. The learned Sessions Judge sentenced the accused-appellant u/s. 376, IPC for imprisonment of life together with a fine of Rs. 100. 00 and in default to further undergo six months R. I. , u/s. 366-A, IPC the learned Sessions Judge convicted the accused-appellant for l0 years R. I. together with a fine of Rs. 100. 00 and in default to further undergo six months R. I. , u/s. 377, IPC the accused-appellant is sentenced for 10 years R. I. together with a fine of Rs. 100. 00 and in default to further undergo six months R. I. u/s. 324, IPC the learned Sessions Judge has sentenced the accused-appellant for one years R. I. and u/s. 342 sentenced the accused-appellant for six months R. I. According to the judgment of learned Sessions Judge the sentences awarded by him to accused-appellant are to run concurrently. ( 2 ) THE facts of the prosecution story in nutshell can be recapitulated within the narrow compass. It is alleged by the prosecution that on 29-7-85 at about 10 a. m. the accused-appellant Bhawani Giri alias Deo Karan Maharaj was going with prosecutrix Durga PW-3 by holding her finger. When PW-6 Rukma and PW-8 Laxman Dan saw accused-appellant going with prosecutrix PW-3 Durga they enquired from the accused-appellant as to where he was taking the prosecutrix, whereupon the accused-appellant replied that prosecutrix was demanding in santha, (sugarcane) therefore, he was going with her to provide her santha and as such the accused-appellant went along with prosecutrix. The prosecutrix Durga reached her house at about 2 p. m. Looking at the physical condition of the prosecutrix her mother PW-5 Suwati/and her grand-mother went along with prosecutrix where PW-8 Laxman Dan, Awar Dan and Kailash were sitting. The prosecutrix Durga reached her house at about 2 p. m. Looking at the physical condition of the prosecutrix her mother PW-5 Suwati/and her grand-mother went along with prosecutrix where PW-8 Laxman Dan, Awar Dan and Kailash were sitting. Both ladies showed the physical condition of the prosecutrix to the aforesaid persons and requested them to see what has been done with the prosecutrix by the accused-appellant. All the witnesses present at the shop of Kailash saw and found that blood was coming out from her vagina and anas and further found that there was swelling on these parts of the body of the prosecutrix. They further found injuries of teeth on her cheeks. All these witnesses asked from the prosecutrix how all this happened upon which the prosecutrix named the accused-appellant. All these witnesses were satisfied from the physical condition of the prosecutrix that the accused-appellant has committed rape and sodomy with the prosecutrix. The villagers collected at the shop of Kailash went in search of accused-appellant. PW-4 Bhanwarlal, PW-8 Laxman Dan, PW-9 Vishan Dan and Daroga reached at the Jhunpa of PW-10 Badri, where the accused-appellant was sitting. All these persons caught hold of the accused-appellant and brought him in the village. Many more villagers collected there and after seeing the act of bestiality committed by the accused-appellant with the prosecutrix enraged and infuriated mob started to belabour the accused-appellant. It is further alleged in the FIR that the accused-appellant was living in the village for one year as a sadhu and was respected by the villagers as a saint. Earlier he was living at Ghariawali Bagechi where his gudra was lying. It is alleged that the accused-appellant has committed rape and sodomy with the prosecutrix at Ghariawali Bagechi. The accused-appellant was taken to police station along with prosecutrix where written FIR Ex. P/5 was lodged on the basis of which formal FIR Ex. P/6 was drawn at Police Station Pilwa district Nagaur and investigation commenced. ( 3 ) AFTER completion of usual investigation, a challan was submitted by the police in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Parbatsar who committed the case for trial vide his order dated 19-10-85 to the Court of Sessions Judge. The learned Sessions Judge framed charges against the accused-appellant for the offences u/ss. 366-A, 376, 377, 324 and 342 IPC. The accused-appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The learned Sessions Judge framed charges against the accused-appellant for the offences u/ss. 366-A, 376, 377, 324 and 342 IPC. The accused-appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. ( 4 ) IN support of the prosecution story the prosecution has examined PW-l Dr. Anju Toshniwal, PW-2 Dr. Satyanarayan Sharma, PW-3 Kumari Durga (prosecutrix), PW-4 Bhanwarlal, PW-5 Smt. Suwati, PW-6 Smt. Rukma, PW-7 Shankar, PW-8 Laxman Dan, PW 9 Vishan Dan, PW-10 Badri, PW-11 Ganpat Lal, PW-12 Prabhu Singh, PW-13 Pratap Singh, PW-14 Datar Singh, PW-15 Dr. BL Bhatia and PW-16 Subhkaran, Investigating Officer. In support of prosecution story the prosecution has also produced 18 documents i. e. Ex. P/1 to Ex. P/18. ( 5 ) THE learned Sessions Judge after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor as well as the learned counsel for the accused-appellant recorded a finding of guilt against the accused-appellant for committing offences u/ss. 366-A, 376, 377, 324, 342 IPC and sentenced him for these offences as mentioned in the preceding paragraph. ( 6 ) WE have heard learned counsel for the accused-appellant Shri Harish Mathur (amicus curiae) and learned Public Prosecutor Shri D. R. Bohra at length and have critically gone through the evidence on record. ( 7 ) THE learned counsel for the accused-appellant urged before us firstly that there is no direct evidence on record and it is not safe to convict the accused-appellant on the basis of circumstantial evidence. Secondly, PW-3 prosecutrix Durga is a child witness and the learned Sessions Judge has wrongly placed reliance on her deposition and lastly the statement of PW-5 Smt. Suwati, PW-6 Rukma, PW-7 Shankar, PW-8 Laxman Dan, PW-9 Vishan Dan and PW-10 Badri are interested and partisan witnesses and, therefore, it would be unsafe to base conviction on the deposition of these witnesses. ( 8 ) THE learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State Shri D. R. Bohra refuted the aforesaid arguments advanced on behalf of the accused-appellant and submitted that in the instant case prosecution has proved its case to the hilt beyond all reasonable doubt and the arguments contrary to it are devoid of merits and truth. According to learned Public Prosecutor the prosecution story narrated by the prosecution witnesses named above is absolutely natural coupled with the surrounding circumstances of the case. According to learned Public Prosecutor the prosecution story narrated by the prosecution witnesses named above is absolutely natural coupled with the surrounding circumstances of the case. According to him the accused-appellant was a sadhu and the inhabitants of the village used to respect him but in the garb of his saintly life he has betrayed their faith and has committed rape and sodomy with prosecutrix PW-3 Durga who was a baby child of three years on the date of occurrence. The learned Public Prosecutor further invited our attention to the depositions made by PW-1 Dr. Anju Toshniwal, PW-2 Dr. Satyanarayan Sharma, Medical Jurist and PW-15 Dr. B. L. Bhatia who proved the prosecution story beyond any pale of doubt and the accused-appellant who has committed rape and sodomy with the baby child of three years deserves deterrent maximum punishment and as such the finding of guilt and sentences awarded by the learned Sessions Judge in the instant case is eminently just and proper and does not require indulgence of this Court. ( 9 ) WE have given our thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions raised at the Bar and have carefully gone through the evidence on record. ( 10 ) AS regards the first and second contentions raised on behalf of the accused-appellant to the effect that there is no direct evidence on record and it is not safe to convict the accused-appellant on the basis of circumstantial evidence and the prosecutrix PW-3 Durga is a child witness and the learned Sessions Judge has wrongly placed reliance on her depositions are not correct. In our considered opinion irrespective of clinching circumstantial evidence, there is direct evidence of PW-3 Durga prosecutrix which leads towards an irresistible conclusion that the accused-appellant has committed the act of bestiality with the prosecutrix who was a baby child aged three years old on the date of occurrence. We have carefully examined the statement of PW-3 Durga prosecutrix whose statement has been recorded as a child witness in question answer form. PW-3 Durga prosecutrix has categorically deposed before the learned Sessions Judge that the accused-appellant was sitting over her and he was nacked. The child witness PW-3 has further stated that due to the act of the accused-appellant she received injuries. PW-3 Durga has further stated that the accused-appellant kissed her and caused injuries to her. PW-3 Durga prosecutrix has categorically deposed before the learned Sessions Judge that the accused-appellant was sitting over her and he was nacked. The child witness PW-3 has further stated that due to the act of the accused-appellant she received injuries. PW-3 Durga has further stated that the accused-appellant kissed her and caused injuries to her. It is also stated that the accused-appellant taken her with him under a pretext that he would give her santha. ( 11 ) IN our considered opinion the statement of PW-3 child witness is unpolluted statement and her statement is fully corroborated from the injuries found by PW-1 and PW-2 on her vagina and anus. The learned Sessions Judge has an opportunity to see the deameanour of PW-3 child witness and in our humble opinion the learned Sessions Judge has committed no error in appreciating the testimonial value of PW-3 and an argument contrary to it is devoid of merit. ( 12 ) IT is well to remember that in rape cases courts must bear in mind human psychology and behavioural probability while assessing the testimonial potency of the victims version. The injury on the person of victim specially her private parts have corroborative value. In the instant case a perusal of depositions of PW-1 Dr. Anju Toshniwal, Medical Jurist, and her medical examination report of victim dated 2-8-83 Ex. P/1 reveals that PW-1 found the hymen of prosecutrix was torn and ruptured and fourchette was also found to be torn and ruptured. Ex. P/1 further reveals that PW-1 found multiple perional lacerations present and-sphincter was also found to be loosened. According to Ex. P/1 PW-1 has taken vaginal swab and smear for chemical examination. PW-1 has proved Ex. P/1 about these injuries found on the private parts of the body of the victim and nothing has been brought to our notice as to how and why the depositions made by PW-1 and medical examination report Ex. P/1 prepared by her should not be believed which fully corroborates the testimony of child witness PW-3. ( 13 ) THE injury report of victim prepared by Medical Jurist FW-2 Dr. Satyanarayan Sharma also corroborates the testimony of PW-3 Durga prosecutrix. The injury report prepared by PW-2 is available on record as Ex. P/2 which reveals that the prosecutrix PW-3 has following injuries on her person on the date of examination :-"1. ( 13 ) THE injury report of victim prepared by Medical Jurist FW-2 Dr. Satyanarayan Sharma also corroborates the testimony of PW-3 Durga prosecutrix. The injury report prepared by PW-2 is available on record as Ex. P/2 which reveals that the prosecutrix PW-3 has following injuries on her person on the date of examination :-"1. On examination following findings are observed : Mark of teeth bite on left cheek - upper and lower teeth marks in round area of 1 1/2" diameter. Redish bruise with swelling present over the left side face around the teeth mark 2 1/2" x 2" area. 2. Mark of teeth bite on right cheek. Upper and lower teeth marks in round area of 1 1/2" diameter. Redish Bruise with swelling present over the right side face around the teeth mark 3" x 2" area. 3. Mark of teeth bite on right forehead upper and lower teeth marks is round area of l 1/2" diameter Redish Bruise with swelling present over the forehead around the teeth mark 2" x 2" area. 4. Tear (laceration) over Anus 1/2" 1/4" 1/4" on past side. 5. Abraion 1/2" x 1/8" in between the vagina and anus. 6. Tear laceration 1/2" x 1/4" x 1/8" on right lateral margin of anus. Anal Sphincter is loosened. Redish fluidly blood coming from Anus and vagina. Refd to Medical Jurist JLN Hospital, Ajmer for further checkup by Gynocologist and Surgeon to rule out internal injury. ( 14 ) EX. P/2 injury report prepared by PW-2 Dr. S. N. Sharma, Medical Jurist has been proved by him which reveals that the victim has three marks of teeth bite injuries on her cheeks i. e. injury Nos. 1, 2 and 3. Injury No. 4 speaks about tear (laceration) over anus 1/2" x 1/4" x 1/4" on post evior side. Injury No. 5 speaks about abrasion 1/2" x 1/8" in between vagina and anus and injury No. 6 speaks about tear laceration 1/2" x 1/4" x 1/8" on right lateral margin of anus. P. W. 2 Dr. S. N. Sharma has clearly mentioned in his injury report Ex. P/2 that anal sphinster has loosened. Reddish fluidly blood coming from anus and vagina. The Medical Jurist PW-2 referred the case to JLN Hospital, Ajmer for further checkup by Gynecologist and Surgeon to rule out internal injury. ( 15 ) EX. P/3 is the letter written by Dr. S. N. Sharma has clearly mentioned in his injury report Ex. P/2 that anal sphinster has loosened. Reddish fluidly blood coming from anus and vagina. The Medical Jurist PW-2 referred the case to JLN Hospital, Ajmer for further checkup by Gynecologist and Surgeon to rule out internal injury. ( 15 ) EX. P/3 is the letter written by Dr. S. N. Sharma PW-2 to the Government Hospital. The aforesaid injury reports prepared by PW-1 Dr. Anju Toshniwal and PW-2 Dr. Sharma fully corroborates the testimony of prosecutrix about involvement of the accused-appellant in committing rape and sodomy with the prosecutrix PW-3 Durga. The Medical examination report Ex. P/1 prepared by PW-1 Medical Jurist throws a flood of light that hymen of the victim was turned and ruptured and the injuries found on the anus and vagina and other parts of the body of the victim by PW-3 is enough to prove the prosecution case from all shadow of doubt that it is the accused-appellant who had committed rape and sodomy with the prosecutrix PW-3 Durga and as such we repel the first and second argument advanced by the learned counsel for the accused-appellant. It is incorrect to say that the learned Sessions Judge has convicted the accused-appellant on a circumstantial evidence. In fact there is direct evidence of PW-3 prosecutrix which is fully corroborated from the deposition of PW-1 and PW-2 as well as the medical examination report prepared by PW-1 Ex. P/1 and injury report Ex. P/2 prepared by PW-2. ( 16 ) THE last argument of the learned counsel for the accused-appellant before us is that the learned Sessions Judge has committed error in appreciating the testimonial value of PW-5 Smt. Suwati, PW-6 Smt. Rukma, PW-7 Shankar PW-8 Laxman Dan, PW-9 Vishan Dan and PW-10 Badri who are according to him interested and partisan witnesses. The aforesaid argument of the learned counsel for the accused-appellant is misconceived and fallacious in as much as PW-7 Shankar, PW-8 Laxman Dan, PW-9 Vishan Dan and PW-10 Badri are the independent witnesses and they cannot be said to be partisan and interested witnesses. If the mother or grand-mother of the child has reported the matter to the moitbir persons of the village they do not become interested witnesses. If the mother or grand-mother of the child has reported the matter to the moitbir persons of the village they do not become interested witnesses. ( 17 ) AS regards PW-5 Smt. Suwati, who is the mother of the victim and PW-6 Smt. Rukma, who is the grand-mother of victim, it is held that the interested and partisan witnesses evidence is not necessarily unreliable evidence. Even partisanship by itself is not a valid ground for discrediting or rejecting sworn testimony. All that is necessary is that the evidence of interested witnesses should be subjected to careful scrutiny and accepted with caution. If on such scrutiny the interested testimony is found to be intrinsically reliable or inherently probable it may by itself be sufficient in the circumstance of a particular case to base a conviction thereon. Moreover such interested witnesses will be last persons to screen the real culprit and substitute a wrong person. ( 18 ) IN the light of the aforesaid caution we have examined the testimony of PW-5 and PW-6 who are mother and grand-mother respectively of the victim. It is deposed by PW-5 that on the date of occurrence about 8 or 9 months earlier the PW-3 came at her residence and she found blood on her anus and vagina and also found blood on her legs and asked from PW-3 as to how she received all these injuries upon which PW-3 informed her mother PW-5 that the accused-appellant had beaten her and kissed her due to which she suffered bleeding. At that time according to PW-5, her mother-in-law was also present at her house, therefore, both of them went along with prosecutrix at the shop of Kailash where Laxman Dan, Bhanwarlal etc. were sitting and told them to see what accused-appellant has done with the prosecutrix. The aforesaid conduct of PW-5 and PW-6 is quite natural and nothing has been brought to our notice as to why the testimony of PW-5 and PW-6 should not be believed. ( 19 ) IT is pertinent to mention that PW-6 had stated before the learned Session Judge that while accused-appellant was going with the prosecutrix by holding her finger she and Laxman Dan asked him as to where he was going alongwith prosecutrix upon which the accused-appellant replied that prosecutrix was demanding santha, therefore, he was taking her along with him to provide her with a santha. According to PW-6 when prosecutrix arrived at the house weeping, it was asked from her as to how she received all these injuries on her vagina and anus then prosecutrix replied that the accused-appellant has beaten her and kissed her which has caused all these injuries on her person. Upon this information PW-6 along with her daughter-in-law and the victim went at the shop of Kailash where Laxman Dan, Bhanwarlal etc. were sitting. The aforesaid conduct of PW-5 and PW-6 according to us are quite natural in the surrounding circumstances of the case. The deposition of PW-5 and PW-6 are corroborated by other independent witnesses as well as from the deposition of Medical Jurist PW-1 and PW-2. Thus, in our considered opinion the depositions made by PW-5 and PW-6 in the instant case are intrinsically reliable and the learned Sessions Judge has committed no error in appreciating the testimonial value of PW-5 and PW-6. From the aforesaid discussion we are fully satisfied that the learned Sessions Judge has properly appreciated the testimonial value of PW-5, PW-6, PW-7, PW-8, PW-9 and PW-10 and an argument contrary to it is not acceptable to us. ( 20 ) PW-8 Laxman Dan has deposed before the learned Sessions Judge that about 10 months earlier at about 10 a. m. while he was going to his field along with Rukma PW-6, they saw that the accused-appellant was going with prosecutrix holding her finger. When PW-6 Rukma saw accused-appellant going with prosecutrix holding her finger she enquired from accused-appellant as to where he was going with prosecutrix PW-3 Durga upon which he replied that she was demanding santha, therefore, he was going to provide her santha. According to the deposition of PW-8 when he returned from his field at about 3 p. m. and was sitting at the shop of Kailesh along with Bhanwarlal, Kailash and Awar Dan then mother and grand-mother of prosecutrix came there along with prosecutrix and shown them the physical injuries received by the prosecutrix. All the persons present along with him saw the marks of teeth injuries on the cheeks of prosecutrix and they also saw blood coming out from her vagina and anus. All the persons present there along with PW-8 found the swelling on her cheeks. All the persons present along with him saw the marks of teeth injuries on the cheeks of prosecutrix and they also saw blood coming out from her vagina and anus. All the persons present there along with PW-8 found the swelling on her cheeks. Thus from the testimony of PW-6 Rukma and PW-8 Laxman Dan it is clear that the prosecutrix was last seen in a normal state of health in the company of the accused, and thereafter she was found in that bad shape by her mother and PW-6 Rukma. This is a very strong link in the prosecution case to connect the accused with the guilt. PW-8 Laxman Dan then went along with others in search of accused-appellant whom they found in the Jhunpa of PW-10 Badri. When PW-8 and others asked him to come out from Jhunpa he initially refused to come out and at this they entered into Jhunpa of PW-10 Badri and caught hold of him. According to PW-8 he along with other villagers brought the accused-appellant in the village and in the presence of the villagers PW-8 asked what he has done with the prosecutrix upon which the accused-appellant stated as follows :-when it was asked by PW-8 at which place he has outraged the modesty of the prosecutrix and at which place he has committed the rape and sodomy with her. He stated before them that he committed the aforesaid sin at Chariawali Bagechi. A question was asked on behalf of the accused-appellant to PW-6 that PW-8 Laxman Dan belong to her caste. In reply PW-6 stated that PW-8 Laxman Dan did not belong to her caste. From the aforesaid discussion we are fully satisfied that PW-8 Laxman Dan is an independent witness and his testimony inspires confidence. ( 21 ) PW-24 Bhanwarlal is also an independent witness who lodged the FIR Ex. P/5 at Police Station and on the basis of which the formal FIR Ex. P/6 was drawn. He has supported the prosecution story and proved the seizure memo of hair of private part of accused-appellant (Ex. P/7), Ex. P/8 seizure memo of frock of prosecutrix Durga, Ex. P/9 seizure memo of hair from the person of Durga. Ex. P/10 seizure memo of blood of Durga, Ex. P/11 seizure memo of Langot of accused-appellant, Ex. P/13 site plan with index and Ex. P/12 seizure memo of gudra, Ex. P/7), Ex. P/8 seizure memo of frock of prosecutrix Durga, Ex. P/9 seizure memo of hair from the person of Durga. Ex. P/10 seizure memo of blood of Durga, Ex. P/11 seizure memo of Langot of accused-appellant, Ex. P/13 site plan with index and Ex. P/12 seizure memo of gudra, Ex. P/14 arrest memo and personal search memo of accused-appellant. Nothing has been brought to our notice to discredit the sworn testimony of PW-4 Bhanwarlal. ( 22 ) THE prosecution has also examined PW-7 Shankar, PW-9 Vishan Dan and PW-10 Badri in support of prosecution story. All these witnesses have supported the prosecution story and nothing has been brought during the course of their examination which may discredit the sworn testimony of these independent witnesses. ( 23 ) A close scrutiny of the judgment rendered by the learned Sessions Judge clearly shows that the learned Sessions Judge had correctly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence on record. We entirely agree with the scrutiny and appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence on record made by the learned Sessions Judge. The finding of guilt recorded by the learned Sessions Judge is based on analytical discussion of oral and documentary evidence on record. The learned Sessions Judge has given cogent and convincing reasons in support of finding of guilt recorded by him with which we are in full agreement. Thus the last submission made by the learned counsel for the accused-appellant is also devoid of merit and is also hereby repelled. ( 24 ) WE have also heard the learned counsel for the accused-appellant on the question of sentence and we are of the opinion that the sentences awarded by the learned Sessions Judge to the accused-appellant are eminently just and proper. In our considered opinion the accused-appellant is a depraved person and has committed rape and sodomy with the prosecutrix PW-3 Durga who was a baby child of three years old on the date of occurrence. The accused-appellant has committed heinous crime and his beastly act of committing rape and sodomy with a baby child of three years deserves a deterrent punishment and the learned Sessions Judge has committed no illegality or impropriety in awarding sentences to the accused-appellant u/ss. 376, 366-A, 377, 324 and 342 IPC. The accused-appellant has committed heinous crime and his beastly act of committing rape and sodomy with a baby child of three years deserves a deterrent punishment and the learned Sessions Judge has committed no illegality or impropriety in awarding sentences to the accused-appellant u/ss. 376, 366-A, 377, 324 and 342 IPC. In view of the aforesaid discussion we confirm his judgment of conviction and affirm the sentences awarded by the learned Sessions Judge to the accused-appellant. In the result of the aforementioned discussion, the instant jail appeal is hereby dismissed and the finding of guilt recorded by the learned Sessions Judge, Merta along with the sentences imposed by him are hereby affirmed. The Jail authorities be informed of the result of the appeal for compliance. Appeal dismissed.