JUDGMENT : C.R. Pal, J. - The appellant assails the order of conviction and sentence dated 8.3.1995 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sambalpur in S.T. Case No. 228 of 1994 wherein the appellant has been convicted and sentenced under Section 363, I.P.C. to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one year and under Section 376 read with Section 511, I.P.C. to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years. 2. The facts of the case runs as follows: - On 2.7.1994 at about 9.00 A.M. the appellant finding P.W.2 a girl belonging to scheduled caste near Pir Baba Crossing asked her to come to his house to clean the lavatory saying that she would be paid Rs. 20/- for that. So the victim girl followed the appellant and when they reached behind an office building within the compound of District Collectorate, Sambalpur the appellant forcibly made her lie down on the ground, removed her Chadi and undressing himself committed sexual intercourse with her. The victim girl was crying along while the appellant was committing the sexual intercourse. After the commission of sexual intercourse when she came from behind the building and was proceeding towards the road weeping, some persons enquired from her as to what happened at which she disclosed before them pointing at the appellant that she was raped by him Being asked by those persons, the appellant disclosed his name as Krushna Chandra Rath. Those two persons took the victim girl and the appellant close to a nearby Telephone Office wherefrom one of those two persons telephoned to Sambalpur Town Police Station about the occurrence. On receiving that message P.W.7, the S.I. of Police, made station diary entry No. 35 dated 2.7.1994 and immediately proceeded to the Telephone Office and found large gathering there. In that gathering the victim girl as well as the appellant were also present. The victim girl seeing the police there orally reported about the incident which was reduced to writing by P.W.7. The victim girl pointing at the appellant implicated him as the perpetrator of the alleged offence. The Investigating Officer also ascertained the name of the appellant. In course of investigation, the I.O. seized the Chadi (M.O.I) of the victim girl under seizure list, Ext. The victim girl pointing at the appellant implicated him as the perpetrator of the alleged offence. The Investigating Officer also ascertained the name of the appellant. In course of investigation, the I.O. seized the Chadi (M.O.I) of the victim girl under seizure list, Ext. 3 and the wearing apparels of the appellant consisting of a pair of Safari and a Khaki underwear (M.O.II) under seizure list, Ext. The victim girl was medically examined on police requisition and the Medical Officer furnished his report, Ext.1. The appellant was also medically examined and a report Ext.6/1 was submitted by the Medical Officer. The seized wearing apparels were sent for chemical examination and the Chemical Examiner submitted his report, Ext.7. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the appellant for the offence under Sections 363, 376, I.P.C. and under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Ultimately, the case came up before the Sessions Judge for trial where the appellant stood charged for the above offences to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 3. The appellant while denying the charges took the stand that the victim girl was working as a maid servant under a Bengali gentleman with whom the appellant had strained relationship. According to the appellant, the said Bengali gentleman has instituted this case falsely implicating him with the alleged offences with the active support of the victim girl just to harass the appellant. 4. In course of trial, seven witnesses were examined. Out of them, P.W.1 is a witness who deposed about the gathering at the Telephone Office and presence of the victim girl as well as the appellant in that gathering. P.W.2 is the victim girl and is the informant in this case. P.W.s.3 and 4 are respectively the mother and father of the victim girl, P.W.5 is the Medical Officer and P.W.s 6 and 7 are the Investigating Officers. The prosecution also exhibited the F.I.R. Ext. 2, medical examination reports Ext. 1, 6/1, Chemical Examiner's report Ext.7. seizure lists Exts. 3 and 4 in support of its case. The appellant did neither examine any witness nor exhibit any document in support of his case. 5. The prosecution also exhibited the F.I.R. Ext. 2, medical examination reports Ext. 1, 6/1, Chemical Examiner's report Ext.7. seizure lists Exts. 3 and 4 in support of its case. The appellant did neither examine any witness nor exhibit any document in support of his case. 5. The learned Sessions Judge relying on the evidence of the victim girl, the I.O. and the P.W.1 and the Chemical Examiner's report Ext.7 and Medical Examination report Ext.1 convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned above while acquitting him from the charge under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant assails the order of conviction contending that in absence of any corroborating evidence from any independent witness, the learned Sessions Judge should not have placed reliance on the version of the prosecutrix particularly when the evidence of the medical officer who examined the victim girl is against recent sexual intercourse. The learned Addl. Standing Counsel, on the other hand, contended that in such a case solely on the evidence of the prosecutrix a conviction can be sustained, if the evidence of the prosecutrix is found to be reliable and free from infirmity. In the above context, it is noticed from the evidence on record that the victim girl was found coming from behind the office building weeping just after the alleged occurrence. From the evidence of P.W.2 it appears that when she disclosed about the occurrence pointing at the appellant as the perpetrator of the crime the appellant was detained by those persons. From the evidence of P.W.7, the I.O., it appears that some one telephonically reported about the incident to the P.S. for which S.D.E. No.35 dated 2.7.94 was made and he proceeded to the spot and found the victim as well as the appellant there amidst a gathering near the telephone office. He took charge of the appellant. The girl was sent for medical examination. The evidence of the medical officer who examined her reveals that on examination the medical officer could not detect any sign of recent sexual intercourse. Relying on the evidence of the medical officer the learned counsel of the appellant submitted that the evidence of the prosecutrix which is contrary to medical evidence should have been discarded in toto. The evidence of the medical officer who examined her reveals that on examination the medical officer could not detect any sign of recent sexual intercourse. Relying on the evidence of the medical officer the learned counsel of the appellant submitted that the evidence of the prosecutrix which is contrary to medical evidence should have been discarded in toto. But in the instant case the Chadi (M.O.I) of the victim girl and the underwear (M.O.II) of the appellant were seized and were sent for chemical examination. The Chemical Examiner's report reveals that M.O.I. the Chadi and M.O.II. the underwear were stained with human semen of Group B. No explanation is offered by the accused as to how the semen of the same origin which was found in his undergarment was found on the Chadi of the victim girl. However, when the evidence of the victim girl is read with the evidence of the medical officer doubt arises about actual penetration. But for this reason the other evidence of the victim girl cannot be thrown away as falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus is neither a second principle nor is followed in India in administration of criminal justice. It is also found from the evidence that prior to the occurrence the prosecutrix had no experience of sexual act. So, even if on the basis of the evidence of the medical officer it is accepted that there was no penetration, the action of the accused will definitely amount to an attempt to commit rape as from the evidence of the prosecutrix, it appears that the appellant undressed her and performed certain sexual act. The presence of human semen on the Chadi of the girl and on the underwear of the appellant also suggests that there was ejaculation. That the semen found on the Chadi and underwear is of same group is evident from the Chemical Examiner's report, Ext.7. Presence of semen of Group B in M.O.I. and M.O.II corroborates the version of the P.W.2 about the sexual act performed by the appellant and there is absolutely no reason to discard the above evidence. In the instant case, there is also no evidence on record to show that the prosecutrix had any grudge or ill-will towards the appellant. She is an unmarried minor girl. In the instant case, there is also no evidence on record to show that the prosecutrix had any grudge or ill-will towards the appellant. She is an unmarried minor girl. No motive is imputed to her as to why she has come forward with the allegation of rape against the appellant involving herself in the occurrence which has a tendency to bring disrepute to her and lower her dignity. The appellant it is noticed had measurably failed to adduce any evidence in support of his case. No suggestion has even been given to any witness that the case against him has been started at the instance of a Bengali gentleman with whom he had strained relationship. The learned Sessions Judge therefore has rightly disbelieved the defence version. On a careful scrutiny of the evidence on record keeping in view the principle laid down by the apex Court in State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh and others, AIR 1996 S.C. 1393 , I also do not find any infirmity in the evidence of the P.W.2 to discard the same in its entirety. So the contention of the learned counsel must fail. 7. The learned counsel of the appellant also contended that in absence of any finding that there was taking or enticing of the prosecutrix from the keeping of the lawful guardian the conviction and sentence passed under Section 363 of the I.P.C. is liable to be set aside. The learned Additional Standing Counsel, on the other hand, urged that there are ample evidence on record to establish the guilt of the appellant under Section 363, I.P.C. In the above context, it may be stated that to constitute the offence of kidnapping from lawful guardianship it must be proved that the girl kidnapped is under 18 years of age and that the appellant enticed away the girl from the keeping of the lawful guardian. In the above context, it is also noticed that the victim girl on oath has stated her age to be 12 years. The P.W.1 has deposed that the girl is aged about 11 years. The medical officer who examined the girl has opined that the age of the girl by the time of her examination was 11 to 12 years. The defence has not disputed the age of the girl. The P.W.1 has deposed that the girl is aged about 11 years. The medical officer who examined the girl has opined that the age of the girl by the time of her examination was 11 to 12 years. The defence has not disputed the age of the girl. No cross-examination has also been done or even suggestion has been given either to the victim girl or to the witnesses to the effect that the girl is not aged about 10 to 12 years or is more than 15 years. The learned Sessions Judge discussing the evidence has also found that the girl was aged 12 years at the time of the alleged occurrence. From the above, it is clear that the girl was a minor girl at the time of the alleged occurrence. The next question arises as to whether there was taking and enticing from the keeping of the lawful guardianship. The victim girl in her testimony says "Last year during Summer on a day at 10.00 to 12 A.M. I was present near Pir Baba Chowk. The accused present in the dock told me to clean the lavatory on payment of Rs. 20/-. So saying the accused took me inside the office compound." It is not the case that the girl had abandoned the guardianship of her parents. It is also not necessary that taking or enticing must be from the house of the parents of the minor. The mere fact that the minor girl is away from home, say on a public street, or in a market or such other place, does not mean that she is not in the keeping of her guardian. Therefore, relying on the evidence of the prosecutrix who has no axe to grind against the appellant, it can safely be held that the conviction of the appellant under Section 363, I.P.C is well-founded. Hence, the contention of the learned counsel of the appellant fails. 8. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. Final Result : Dismissed