JUDGMENT R.L. Khurana, J.—Appellant Satish Kumar has been convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Solan on 11-12-1996 for the offence under section 376, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000 and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one year. In brief, the prosecution story is this. The appellant is a resident of Panjgain, District Bilaspur and presently residing with his family at Navgaon, Tehsil Arki, District Solan. He is an astrologer by profession. His wife, Smt. Leela Devi (PW 3) is a Home Guard Cadet. He has a daughter, Kumari Diksha (PW-2) and a son He has a taken on rent two rooms in the building of one Tulsi Ram and residing there with his family. Kumari Diksha (PW-2) is of about 12 years of age. 2. On 11-9-1995 a report was made by PW-2 Kumari Diksha at Police Station Sadar Bilaspur stating that about 15/16 days back her mother alongwith her younger brother had gone to her parents house and she was alone in the house alongwith her father, the appellant. After taking meals, she went to her room. The appellant at that time was taking to some teachers outside. After some time the appellant came to her room, lifted her in his arms and carried her to his room and made her sleep on his cot. The appellant then opened her salwar by loosening the waist-band and committed sexual intercourse with her. When she tried to raise cries, the appellant gagged her mouth and told her that he was performing "Yoga" exercise. During the sexual act she suffered a lot of pain. Her private part started bleeding and the clothes which she was wearing were besmeared with blood. The appellant got such clothes washed before the arrival of her mother. She was also threatened not to disclose anything to anyone, otherwise she would be done away with. She, therefore, did not disclose anything to her mother even on 9-91995 the appellant returned home at night under the influence of liquor without any rhyme or reason be started abusing her mother in a filthy manner. She was also threatened not to disclose anything to anyone, otherwise she would be done away with. She, therefore, did not disclose anything to her mother even on 9-91995 the appellant returned home at night under the influence of liquor without any rhyme or reason be started abusing her mother in a filthy manner. He even pushed her out of the home by telling her to go away with her son the appellant when tried to drag Kumari Diksha inside the room, she told her mother that she would not like to stay with the appellant as he was a sinner and not her father. She also told her mother about her ha vim g been subjected to forcible sexual intercourse by the appellant few days back. The prosecutrix Kumari Diksha alongwith her mother and younger brother then left the house and went to the house of her maternal .grand parents in village Sainfarde. 3. On the basis of such report the prosecutrix was got medically examined at District Hospital, Bilaspur at about 3.00 p.m. PW-18 Dr J. Goswamy conducted the medical examination. He observed as under :— (i) There was no mark of violence on the person of the prosecutrix ; (ii) The prosecutrix was found to be a well built young female ; (iii) Breasts were well developed, public hairs scantry ; (iv) Vaginal introduction permitted introduction of two fingers ; (v) Slides of vaginal smears showed absence of sperm, gonococcus of trichomonas vaginal ; and (vi) The age of the prosecutrix was found to be between 12-1/2 to 15 years. In the opinion of the doctor, no sexual intercourse had taken place with the prosecutrix during the last one week. 4. Since the offence was found to have been committed within the local limits of jurisdiction of Police Station Darlaghat, District Solan, a copy of the report alongwith the medico legal certificate was forwarded to the said Police Station on the basis of which a case for the offence under section 376, Indian Penal Code, came to be registered vide F.I.R. No. 58 of 1995. 5. During the course of investigation, the investigation officer prepared the spot map (Ex. PW-19/N), took into possession the clothes which the prosecutrix was wearing at the relevant time alongwith the quilt and its cover. The school leaving certificate showing the date of birth of the prosecutrix was also taken into possession. 5. During the course of investigation, the investigation officer prepared the spot map (Ex. PW-19/N), took into possession the clothes which the prosecutrix was wearing at the relevant time alongwith the quilt and its cover. The school leaving certificate showing the date of birth of the prosecutrix was also taken into possession. The appellant was arrested on 13-9-1995. He was got medically examined and found capable of performing sexual intercourse. 6. The appellant was charged to stand trial for the offence under section 376, Indian Penal Code. He pleaded not guilty. la his statement recorded under section 313, Code of Criminal Procedure, the appellant denied having committed rape. It was stated that he had been falsely implicated in the present case at the instance of his wifePW-3 Smt. Leela Devi. He stated that she is a woman of easy virtues and was having clandestine relations with various persons. As and when he used to prevent her from such clandestine relationship, she would raise a quarrel. In his defence, the appellant examined DW-1 Achhru Ram, a scho3l teacher of Navgaon, who has deposed that some time in the month of May, 1995 he had seen the appellant coming out of his house in a fit of anger and on being asked he told him that his wife had spoiled his life and that she would also spoil the life of his children. The appellant also is alleged to have told him that one Prem Lai was usually coming to his house alongwith certain other persons. 7. The learned trial Court upon consideration of the evidence led before it held the appellant guality of the offence under section 376, Indian Penal Code and, accordingly convicted and sentenced him for the said offence as aforesaid. 8. At the very out set, it may be stated that for the reasons to be recorded hereinafter, the conviction and sentence imposed upon the appellant by the learned trial Court cannot be sustained and the same arc liable to be set aside. 9. 8. At the very out set, it may be stated that for the reasons to be recorded hereinafter, the conviction and sentence imposed upon the appellant by the learned trial Court cannot be sustained and the same arc liable to be set aside. 9. It may not be out of place to state below the law as regard the credibility of the testimony of the prosecutrix in the cases of sexual offences, the question of relying upon the same for holding an accused guilty and the necessity of corroboration to the same :- (i) There is no rule of law that corroboration is essential before there can be a conviction solely on the testimony of the prosecutrix. But as a matter of prudence, the necessity of corroboration must be present to the mind of the Judge ; (ii) There may be circumstances in a given case which might make it safe to dispense with such corroboration ; (iii) On the other hand, there may be factors in a case tending to show that the testimony of the prosecutrix suffers from infirmities or defects, in a manner so as to make it either unsafe or impossible to base a finding of guilt on the same. Some of the salient factors of this type may briefly be stated as follows : (a) circumstances showing on the part of the prosecutrix an animus against the accused ; (b) where the question of want of consent is material, circumstances tending to show consent ; for example, absence of material showing an attempt at resistance : absence of any marks of struggle ; (c) attempts at improvement or exaggeration in the version as attempted by the prosecution ; (d) elements of artificiality or unnatrualness in the story as attempted by the prosecutrix ; (e) conduct on the part of the prosecutrix, inconsistency with the y credibility of the version, for example, ommission to make a disclosure at the earliest opportunity ; and (f) absence of signs of rape in the findings of the medical examination on chemical analysis. Examining the testimony of the prosecutrix PW-2 Kumari Diksha in the light of the above legal position, it can be safely concluded that the version given by her suffers from infirmities and/or defects and there has been an attempt on her part at improvements and/or exaggeration in the first version given to the police. 10. Examining the testimony of the prosecutrix PW-2 Kumari Diksha in the light of the above legal position, it can be safely concluded that the version given by her suffers from infirmities and/or defects and there has been an attempt on her part at improvements and/or exaggeration in the first version given to the police. 10. The report Ex. PW 2-A was made to the police by PW-2 Kumari Diksha at Police Station Sadat5 on 11-9-1995 which was subsequently forwarded to Police Station Darlaghat. On the basis of such report F.I.R. Ex PW 19-A was recorded in this report it has been categorically stated by PW 2 that she was subjected to rape by the appellant about 15/16 days back when her mother and younger brother had gone to visit her maternal grand parents. In other words, according to PW 2 she was subjected to rape by the appellant on the night of either 24-8-1995 or 25-8-1993. Further the version coming out in Ex PW 2-A and Ex, PW 19-A is that PW 2 was subjected to rape only once. 11. As against the version given in Ex. PW 2-A and Ex PW 19-A, PW 2 Kumari Diksha in her deposition made before the court, has come out with a new story to the effect that she was subjected to rape by the appellant on two occasions, that is, firstly in the month of May when her mother and younger brother had gone to visit her maternal grand parents on the second occasion on 24th/25th August, 1995. The relevant parts of her statement made in Court as PW 2 on 1-3-1996 read : "In the month of May 1995. 1 alongwith my-father Satish accused were alone in the house. My mother and younger brother had gone to Bilaspur to my Nanihal In the evening my father prepared meals and I cleaned the utensils Thereafter slept in outer room of the house, At about 10/11 p m. he took me to his own room and spread the guilt on the floor and loosened the strings of my salwar and removed the salwar and shirt. Then he committed ‘Bura Kam’ sexual intercourse with me. Then I said to my father that everybodys papas are alike. Then my father said it is a Yoga. I will pour a drop and it will increase your brain intellect and sharp in studies. Then he committed ‘Bura Kam’ sexual intercourse with me. Then I said to my father that everybodys papas are alike. Then my father said it is a Yoga. I will pour a drop and it will increase your brain intellect and sharp in studies. When my father committed sexual intercourse with me 1 had lot to pain When I cried with pain he gaged my mouth with his hand There was blood on the quilt as a result of intercourse. He committed sexual intercourse twice in that evening," "It was probably on 24th/25th August, 1995, my parents, younger brother and I was present in the house, in the evening my mother told me that my father is to tell the outcome of Novo-da>a result, At that time I was in the outer room of the house 1 went to my fathers room, there he told me that I have failed in the examination and asked me to sleep in that room. But my mother asked me to sleep in the outer room on which my father slapped my mother on her head and she became unconscious When my mother fell unconscious, then my father committed (Bura Kara) sexual intercourse with me on the cot. When my mother regained consciousness, on my mother asking. I told her that my father had committed sexual intercourse (Bura Kam) with me on that day and earlier also/ 12. The improvement made and the exaggeration coming in the version of PW 2 in her deposition made in the court on vital points renders the story of the prosecution doubtful. No explanation is forth coming as to why PW 2 failed to mention the alleged incident of May 1993 in her report Ex. PW 2-A made to the police. Another vital contradiction coming on record is with regard to the date on which PW 2 alongwith her mother and younger brother left the house at Navgaon for going to the house of her maternal grand parents. In the first version made out in Ex PW 2-A, PW 2, ner mother and younger brother left the house of the appellant at Navgaon on the night of 9-9-1995 after the appellant is alleged to have quarreled with his wife while under the influence of liquor. In the first version made out in Ex PW 2-A, PW 2, ner mother and younger brother left the house of the appellant at Navgaon on the night of 9-9-1995 after the appellant is alleged to have quarreled with his wife while under the influence of liquor. PW 10 Shiv Ram, the maternal grand father of the prosecutrix, has stated that the prosecutrix, her mother and younger brother had come to his house on 10-9-1995. 13. However, while appearing in court the prosecutrix and her mother have come out with the version that she alongwith her mother and younger brother left the house on the night of 24th or 25th of August, 1995 and stayed (or the night at the house of one Mani Ram, Harijan (PW 4). For the next two days, they stayed in the house of PW 5 Achhru Ram and thereafter they were escorted by the brother of PW 5 to the house of PW 10 Shiv Ram, the maternal grand father of the prosecutrix. 14. If the version given by the prosecutrix and her mother in their statements made in the Court is accepted, then the prosecutrix alongwith her mother and younger brother must have reached the house of PW 10 Shiv Ram either on 27th or 28th of August, 1995. This fact stands belied by PW 10 Shiv Ram, who has deposed that the prosecutrix alongwith her mother and younger brother came to his house only on 10th of September, 1995. 15. It the prosecutrix is taken to have left the house of the appellant on the night of 9th September, 1995 after she was alleged to have been raped for the second time, then the story that she was subjected to rape on 24th or 25th of August, 1995 stands belied since as per the prosecution own case the prosecutrix left the house of the appellant alongwith her mother and younger brother on the night she was subjected to rape by the appellant. 16. The prosecutrix was subjected to medical examination on 11-9-1995 PW18 Dr. 16. The prosecutrix was subjected to medical examination on 11-9-1995 PW18 Dr. Goswami who carried out medical examination of the prosecutrix has specifically ruled out the possibility of the prose cutrix having been subjected to sexual intercourse during the past one week prior to her medical examination In other words, no sexual intercourse was committed with the prosecutrix since 4-9-1995, This evidence, falsifies the prosecution story regarding the alleged rape on 9-9-1995. 17. There is yet another significant aspect of the case. As per PW 18 Dr Goswami, when the prosecutrix was brought before for medical examination, she had given the history of the case. PW 18 recorded the history so given by the prosecutrix in the medico legal certificate/Ex. PW 18-B. It reads .— “Alleged H/O sexual intercourse by her own father about 1 month back on 3 occasions on the same night H/O one episode of sexual intercourse against about 10/15 days back," 18. While appearing in Court PW 18 has reiterated that the history of the case in the above said terms was given to him by the prosecutrix. According to this history given to PW 18 by the prosecutrix, she is alleged to have been subjected to rape on both the occasions in the month of August, 1995. This again belies the story of the alleged rape in the month of May, 1995. 19. As stated above, in the report Ex. PW 2-A, there is a mention of only one incident of rape alleged to have taken place 13/16 days before the making of the report. In such incident the prosecutrix is alleged to have been subjected to rape only once. While deposing in court as PW 2 the prosecutrix has given two incidents of rape, one in the month of May, 1993 and the second on 9-9-1995. According to her she was subjected to sexual intercourse by the appellant twice in the incident of May, 1995. As against these two contradictory versions, the third version coming out in the history given to PW 18 at the time of medical examination, is that the prosecutrix was subjected to sexual intercourse four times, that is, thrice on a day about a month before the date of medical examination and once about 10/15 days before such medical examination. As against these two contradictory versions, the third version coming out in the history given to PW 18 at the time of medical examination, is that the prosecutrix was subjected to sexual intercourse four times, that is, thrice on a day about a month before the date of medical examination and once about 10/15 days before such medical examination. 20 The contradictions coming in the evidence of the prosecution and the improvements made from time to time assume significance in view of the undue delay in making the report to the police. If it is assumed that the last occurrence of rape took place on 24th/25th August, 1995 as is being made out by the prosecution during the course of evidence in court, the delay of about 17/18 days in making the report to the police has remained unexplained, 21. It has come in evidence of the prosecution that PW 3 Smt. Leela Devi after the alleged occurrence and after leaving the house of the appellant first went to the house of PW 4 Mani Ram where she stayed for the night- The occurrence was narrated to him On the following morning she had the occasion to talk about the occurrence to PW 5 Achhru Ram and his brother. She stayed at the house of PW 5 Achhru Ram for two days she then went to the house of her father PW 10. Shiv Ram and told him about the occurrence. Thereafter she alongwith her father went to PW 9 Prem Lal in village Kunala and told him about the occurrence. It is only then that she went to the police station, Sadar Bilaspur, accompanied by PW 9, PW 10 and the prosecutrix Even at the police station she happened to meet the Deputy Superintendent of Police and had narrated the occurrence to him before the report actually came to be made The story so put forward points out only two probabilities, that is, either that the same has been introduced in an attempt to explain the delay in making the report or that the report came to be made only after due deliberations and consultations, 22. Another suspicious circumstance appearing in the evidence of the prosecution may also be noticed The prosecutrix is shown to have been medically examined on 11-9-1995 at about 3,00 p.m by PW 18. Another suspicious circumstance appearing in the evidence of the prosecution may also be noticed The prosecutrix is shown to have been medically examined on 11-9-1995 at about 3,00 p.m by PW 18. The medico legal certificate issued on the same day in this regard is Ex. PW 18-8 The report Ex. PW 2-A alongwith medico legal certificate Ex PW 18-B was sent to police station Darlaghat on 11-9-1995 and the same is stated to have been received at Darlaghat at 1150 p m. on 11-9 1995 when FXR, Ex. PW 19-A came to be recorded on the basis of Ex, PW 2-A. 23. As per the prosecution case PW 18 after medical examination had referred the prosecutrix to Radiologist for determination of her bony age. The prosecutrix was examined by Radiologist PW 15 on 13-9-1995 and she gave her opinion Ex PW-15/A on the said date. Though the Radiologist gave opinion Ex PW 15/A on 13-9-1995, the medico legal certificate Ex. PW 18/A prepared by PW 18 on 11-9-1995 and handed over to the police on the same day, contains as opinion in the hand of PW 18 to the effect that according to Radiologist the age of the prosecutrix was between 12-1/2 to 15 years A bare perusal of Ex PW 18/A shows that the entire medico legal certificate appear to have been prepared in one go and at the same time. The endorsement as to the opinion of the Radiologist has not been shown to have been made by PW 18 on a day after 13-9-1995 PW 18 in his statement made in Court has not stated that the medico legal certificate was brought to him by the investigation officer either on 13 9~1S95 or on any subsequent day and that the endorsement as to the opinion of Radiologist was made by him then Even the investigation officer FW 19 is silent on this aspect. Under the circumstances the only inference is that Ex. PW 18/B in fact was never prepared at the time and on the date the same is shown to have been prepared and issued Similarly, the report Ex PW 2-A as well as the FIR can be said to have not been prepared on the date and time the same are shown to have been prepared. 24. PW 18/B in fact was never prepared at the time and on the date the same is shown to have been prepared and issued Similarly, the report Ex PW 2-A as well as the FIR can be said to have not been prepared on the date and time the same are shown to have been prepared. 24. PW 19, the investigation officer has stated that the appellant was arrested by him at about 3.45 P.M. on 12-9-1995 from Police Station, Sadar, Bilaspur. He could not, however, state as to how the appellant was present at police station, Sadar, He pleaded ignorance to the suggestion that the appellant was summoned to the police station, Sadar, Bilaspur through a false wireless message that his wife was seriously ill and lying admitted in the hospital Be it stated that PW 3 Smt Leela Devi has admitted that in her capacity as Home Guard Cadet, she was posted on duty at District Hospital, Bilaspur. 25. Since the case pertained to Police Station Darlaghat, the appellant could not have been summoned at police station, Sadar, Bilaspur. The prosecution has failed to explain the presence of appellant at the said police station Besides, there is also nothing on the record to show as to how PW 19, the investigation officer came to know about the presence of the appellant at police station, Sadar, Bilaspur. It has come in the statement of PW 19 that after the registration of the case, he had gone to the house of the appellant in village Navgaon but the same was locked. IfPW19was searching for the appellant at Navgaon, the prosecution should have explained as to how PW 19 came to know about the presence of appellant at Bilaspur, It is in the statement of PW 19 that from Navgaon he had proceeded for Bilaspur accompanied by PW 2 and PW 3 and that no inquiries were made by his from anyone on that day. 26. Ex. PW 2-C is the recovery memo prepared by the investigation officer at the time of taking into possession of/the clothes of PW 2 which she is alleged to be wearing at the time of occurrence. The under-wear and the salwar have been described therein as under :— (a) underwear of yellow colour ; and (b) salwar printed in red and yellow colours. These clothes were sent for chemical examination. The under-wear and the salwar have been described therein as under :— (a) underwear of yellow colour ; and (b) salwar printed in red and yellow colours. These clothes were sent for chemical examination. Ex PW 19-C is the report of Chemical examination wherein it has been mentioned as under :— (a) Brown coloured cotton underwear ; and (b) Printed salwar of yelloy and black colours. A combined reading of Ex PW 2-C and Ex PW 19-C shows that the clothes shown to have been into possession were different then the one sent to Forensic Laboratory for examination. How the clothes came to be changed? No explanation is forthcoming. Thus, a shadow of doubt is casted on the truthfulness of the prosecution story 27. Articles P-l to P-5 are shown to have been taken into possession vide memo. Ex PW 2C on 12-9-1995. It has come in the statement of PW 2 that these articles were taken into possession at Navgaon from the house of appellant. As per PW 19 the investigation officer when he visited Navgaon on 12-9-1995 the house of the appellant was found locked. From there he went to Bilaspur where the appellant was arrested. He has no where stated that he had again gone to Navgaon on the same day after the arrest of the appellant. In the absence of evidence that the investigation officer had again gone to Navgaon on 12-9-1995, the story regading the taking into possession Articles P-l to P-5 stands belied. Considering the evidence coming on record in its, totality, the only conclusion is that the prosecution has not been able to bring home the offence against the appellant. Resultantly, the present appeal is allowed, the conviction and sentence imposed upon the appellant by the learned trial Court vide impugned judgment dated 11-12-1996 is set aside and the appellant is acquitted of the offence under section 376, Indian Penal Code. The appellant is at present confined in jail and undergoing sentence imposed upon him. He shall be released forthwith, if not required in any other case. Appeal allowed.