(1) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated July 28, 1988 passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Criminal Appeal Nos. 452-SB/85. The respondent Jang Bahadur was tried before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala City in Sessions Case No. 19 of 1945 for the offence under Sections 363, 366,506 and 376 Indian Penal Code The prosecution case is that Kumari Geeta who was then a student of VIth class of a local higher School of Ambala city was raped by the respondent Jang Bahadur against her wishes by holding out threats. According to the prosecutrix, Jang Bahadur was known to her because Jang Bahadur stayed as a tenant in the house of prosecutrix for some time. Jang Bahadur misrepresented to the prosecutrix that he was proceeding towards the School where his brother was reading and she should be taken to the said School in his cycle so that she could reach early. But instead of going towards the school, Jang Bahadur had taken her beyond the bundh and after spreading a chaddar in the pits he forcibly broke the string of the Salwar of the prosecutrix and made her lie on the chaddar. Thereafter, holding out threats to her he committed rape on the prosecutrix. It is the further case of the prosecution that when the prosecutrix was found weeping, Mahinder who was the neighbour of the prosecutrix and another person Sant Ram had arrived at the place of the incident and seeing the said persons coming, Jang Bahadur left the place. The prosecutrix immediately narrated about the said offence of committing rape on her. She was then taken to the police station where on the basis of her report, the F.I.R. was registered. The prosecutrix was medically examined and from the report of the lady doctor who had examined her, it transpires that her hyman was found torn. The doctor, however, could not give any definite opinion whether rape had been committed on her. The accused Jang Bahadur was arrested on February 28, 1985 and he was also medically examined. It was found on such medical examination that the accused was capable of sexual intercourse. The doctor, however, could not give any definite opinion whether rape had been committed on her. The accused Jang Bahadur was arrested on February 28, 1985 and he was also medically examined. It was found on such medical examination that the accused was capable of sexual intercourse. The salwar of the prosecutrix and the khes (chaddar) stated to have been spread by the accused at the time of committing rape and the underwear of the accused were seized by the police and were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory for testing. The report reveals that in all the said articles i.e. in the salwar, in the khes (chaddar) and in the underwear of the accused, semen of B group was found. Vaginal swab was also taken for chemical analysis. It also transpires from such analysis that semen was found in the swab. Dr. V. K. Bansal (PW. 2) was the medical officer in the hospital of Ambala City. He examined Jang Bahadur the accused and he noted one abrasion and one lacerated wound on the upper part of the left leg and over the front of the middle of the body respectively and according to the doctor such injuries were simple in nature and had been caused within the 24 hours of examination. It may be stated that such period of injury fits in with the time when the rape is alleged to have been committed on the prosecutrix. (2) FROM the certificate issued by the school, it transpires that the prosecutrix was aged 13 years at the time of incident. Radiological test also performed to determine the age of the prosecutrix. The doctor has given opinion that the age of the prosecutrix was between 9 to 13 years. (3) THE trial Court accepted the prosecution case and convicted the respondent Jang Bahadur, for the offence under Sections 366 506 and 376, Indian Penal Code For the offence under Section 366, Indian Penal Code, the accused was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and also to pay a fine of Rs.500.00, in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of two months. For the offence under section 506, Indian Penal Code the accused was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and for the offence under Section 376, Indian Penal Code the accused was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000.00, in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months. The learned Judge directed that all the sentences would run concurrently. (4) THE accused preferred the said Criminal Appeal Nos. 452-SB/85 before the Punjab and Haryana High Court and as aforesaid, by the impugned judgment the High Court has set aside the conviction and sentence passed against the respondent and the respondent was acquitted by the High Court. It may be indicated here that the accused made a statement to the effect that he was a tenant in the house of the prosecutrix for some time. Because of strained relation he had been falsely implicated for the said offence of rape. Such case has, however, not been accepted either by the trial Court or by the High Court. The High Court has, however, indicated that as from the medical evidence the case of rape was not established and as the evidence of the prosecutrix suffered from improbabilities, the case of the prosecution could not be accepted. The High Court also indicated that it was not conceivable that the prosecutrix should be taken forcibly through the streets of Ambala city and she would not do anything. If the prosecutrix was given a threat while being taken on the carrier of a cycle, she could easily jump from the cycle and raise her voice. (5) WE are, however, unable to accept the view taken by the High Court. Such view is against the weight of the evidence adduced in the case. It is not the case of the prosecutrix that she was forcibly taken on the cycle through the streets of the Ambala city. On the contrary, the case of the prosecutrix is that the accused was known to her because he was a tenant in their house for some time. The accused represented to the prosecutrix that he would take her to the school where his brother was reading and she would reach fast. Hence, she voluntarily took a ride on the cycle of the accused. The accused represented to the prosecutrix that he would take her to the school where his brother was reading and she would reach fast. Hence, she voluntarily took a ride on the cycle of the accused. It was only when the accused had taken her not to the school but near a pit of the bundh and tried to commit rape on her, she protested but then being threatened with dire consequences, she kept quiet. Therefore, the observation of the High Court that the prosecutrix had been forcibly taken through the streets of Ambala city is against the evidence of the prosecutrix. It also appears to us that the High Court has not carefully looked into the medical evidence relating to the examination of the prosecutrix and also of the accused and also the chemical analysis report of the undergarment of the accused, salwar of the prosecutrix and the said chaddar. It has come out from the report of the chemical analyst that all the said articles seized by the police, the same group of semen was found. Even the vaginal swab indicated the presence of semen. The report of the chemical analyst and also the medical examination report support the case of the prosecutrix. The injuries found on the person of the accused also tallied with the time when the commission of rape was alleged. The prosecutrix was found weeping by her neighbour immediately after the incident and the accused was also found leaving the place at that time. The prosecutrix also complained to the said neighbour about the rape committed on her. In view of such evidences, there was no reason to hold that the case against the respondent had not been established. (6) WE, therefore, set aside the order of acquittal passed in favour of the respondent by allowing the appeal and affirm the conviction and sentence passed against the respondent by the trial Court. It may be indicated that the learned counsel appearing for the respondent has submitted before us that the incident had taken place long time back and the respondent was then only 19 years old. He is now married and settled in life. In the aforesaid circumstances, he deserves to be leniently dealt with in the matter of sentence. It may be indicated that the learned counsel appearing for the respondent has submitted before us that the incident had taken place long time back and the respondent was then only 19 years old. He is now married and settled in life. In the aforesaid circumstances, he deserves to be leniently dealt with in the matter of sentence. As we are of the view that the accused had betrayed the trust reposed on him by a young girl of 13 years and had committed the heneious crime by revishing a minor girl forcibly by holding out threats, we do not think that he deserves any leniency in the matter of sentence. The bail bond furnished by the respondent stands cancelled. The accused respondent is directed to be taken into custody to serve out the sentence.