Honble GODARA, J. – This appeal has been preferred by the State under sub-section (1) read with sub-section (3) of Section 378, Cr.P.C. against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 6.12.77 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Churu in Sessions Case No. 7/77 thereby acquitting the accused-respondent of the offence punishable under Section 376/511, I.P.C. (2). Briefly stated, the prosecution story is that P.W. 11 Ram Kumar, resident of village Dudal Lekhu, gave Ex. P. 8 statement to P.W. 15 Saddique Mohd. A.S.I. of P.S. Rajgarh, who happened to pass through the village on 10.2.76 at about 3.30 P.M. Ram Kumar stated that at about 2 P.M. while he was filling bags of sulphate (fertilizer) along with his brother P.W. 10 Girdhari, they heard cries of P.W. 2 Kum. Shanti, who is daughter of P.W. 4 Smt. Bobadi and P.W. 5 Mohar Singh from the side of dudh (thatched room meant for shelter of cattle) situated in the nearby enclosure of the accused Bhura Ram. They immediately rushed towards the same and, on reaching there, they found the doors of the `dudh closed. They pushed and opened the same and found that the accused-respondent was lying over Kum. Sha- nti aged about 15 years. She was forcibly made to lie naked. They caught hold of the accused-respondent and he was removed from there. Kum. Shanti told them that she was sent to fetch a wooden stair-case from the house of the accused who told her that the same was lying in the `dudh inside his enclosure. She entered the `dudh to take the stair-case but the accused surreptitiously came from behind and caught hold of her. She was forcibly undressed and thereafter she was felled on the ground and the accused also fell over her and attempted to commit rape on her. However, as is the prosecution case, the accused could not succeed in accomplishing the act of commission of rape since Ram Kumar as well as Girdhari arrived on the scene. Accused fled away from there. In the meantime, his brother Amar Singh came on the spot and he picked up a quarrel with Ram Kumar and Girdhari. Kum. Shanti was sent to her house whereat she narrated this incident to her mother Smt. Bobadi. Her father Mohar Singh was out of village at that time. (3). After recording Ex. P.8 statement of Ram Kumar, Saddique Mohd. Kum. Shanti was sent to her house whereat she narrated this incident to her mother Smt. Bobadi. Her father Mohar Singh was out of village at that time. (3). After recording Ex. P.8 statement of Ram Kumar, Saddique Mohd. forwarded the same statement with the constable to the Police Station, Rajgarh whe- reat P.W. 14 Bhanwar Singh registered Ex. P. 9 F.I.R. on the basis of Ex. P. 8. Saddique Mohd. started investigation at the site. He inspected the place of occurrence and prepared the site memo. Besides, he also took `Salvar allegedly worn by Kum. Shanti at the time of the occurrence which was found to be torn, resulting from the act of the accused while attempting to untie string of the same. Kum. Sha- nti was also subjected to medical examination by P.W. 1 Dr. S. N. Vyas who, vide Ex. P. 1 M.L.R. found external injuries on her person. (4). After investigation, a charge-sheet under Section 376/511, I.P.C. was presented in the Court of Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Rajgarh, who committed the case to the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Churu who charged the accused with the commission of the offence to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried and hence the trial was completed. (5). The prosecution examined as many as 17 witnesses and also produced documentary evidence. The accused was also examined under Section 313, Cr.P.C. and he denied the prosecution story. Besides, he also stated that he was present at the B.S.F.s M.T. Workshop at Faridkot on the day of the occurrence and he did not visit his village on the date of the occurrence and that he was falsely implicated. He also examined three witnesses in support of his plea of alibi. (6). After hearing both the sides, the learned trial Judge vide his impugned judgment and order, held that the evidence of Kum. Shanti as well as P.W. 10 Gir- dhari, P.W. 11 Ram Kumar and P.W. 4 Smt. Bobadi was self-contradictory, highly exaggerated and unreliable and that it was also proved that the accused-respondent was not in his village and, instead, he was on duty at Faridkot on the day of the occurrence and, therefore, he could not have been present in his village to commit the alleged offence. Accordingly, the accused was acquitted. Hence, the State of Rajasthan has preferred this appeal, as above. (7). Accordingly, the accused was acquitted. Hence, the State of Rajasthan has preferred this appeal, as above. (7). I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor for the State as well as the learned counsel for the accused-appellant, perused the record of the trial Court as well as the impugned judgment and considered the same carefully. (8). The learned Public Prosecutor has contended that the learned Addl. Sessions Judge has not appreciated the prosecution in its right perspective and instead, a great emphasis has been laid on the alleged contradictions, though minor and immaterial, in the statements of P.W. 2 Kum. Shanti, P.W. 10 Girdhari, P.W. 11 Ram Kumar and P.W. 4 Smt. Bobadi, Ex. P. 8 statement was given by Ram Kumar immediately after the occurrence and he had given complete details of the offence committed by the accused as well as the presence of the persons who had witnessed the occurrence. Besides, since the accused, being guilty, had immediately escaped from the village and, any how, reported back at the place of his duty and thereafter he has, with the connivance and assistance of his fellow officers and colleagues, succeeded in creating the false evidence of alibi thereby showing that he was not present at his village on the day of the alleged occurrence and instead he was at the place of his posting. Since he had immediately escaped from the village, the police could not apprehend him immediately and, therefore, no presumption can be raised that since he was not in the village and as a result he could not be apprehended on or about the day of the occurrence. There was no cogent reason or ground to disbelieve Kum. Shanti besides her mother as well as two other eye-witnesses and in view of the fact that an immediate F.I.R. was lodged and investigation was taken up and besides, since accused-person assaulted Kum. Shanti thereby using force on her and she was forcibly felled on rough ground and as a result she received external injuries as borne out of the medical report and, therefore, there was overwhelming evidence before the Court to hold the accused-respondent liable for commission of an offence under Section 376/511 or at least one under Section 354, I.P.C. Therefore, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge while taking technical and superficial view of the prosecution evidence and, at the same time, relying on the defence evidence regarding alibi advanced by the accused-respondent, committed serious irregularity and illegality and as a result this appeal deserves to be accepted. (9). The learned counsel for the accused-respondent while countering all these arguments, contended that all the aforesaid prosecution witnesses were inter se related and were also interested in the prosecution story. The time, place and, in the circumstances, Girdhari and Ram Kumar appeared on the scene and Kum. Shanti was allegedly found lying on the ground in a naked position and the accused was lying naked on her and further she is alleged to have received multiple injuries on her person but, at the same time, no sexual intercourse is stated to have been committed and, neither Smt. Bobadi nor Kum. Shanti lodged report with the police. Instead, as is not natural, the police suddenly appeared on the scene and Ex. P. 8 statement was given by Ram Kumar before Saddique Mohd. on the basis of which F.I.R. Ex. P. 9 was registered and investigation was taken up. (10). Kum. Shanti had given in writing to the police that since she did not re- ceive any injury and, therefore, she did not want to submit for medical examination and, consequently, no medical examination was carried out before 16.2.76. No medical examination regarding her age and commission of sexual intercourse was carried out. In these circumstances, specially when there are material contradictions in the statement of Kum. Shanti as well as Girdhari, Ram Kumar and Smt. Bo- badi which are irreconcilable with the prosecution story and the defence evidence coming from senior and responsible officers of the B.S.F. cannot be brushed aside as false and concocted one and, therefore, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge has intrinsically examined the prosecution evidence and has concluded that the prosecution story, as disclosed, does not inspire confidence that any offence as defined under Section 375, I.P.C. was attempted to be committed by the accused-person and, therefore, the impugned judgment and consequential order of acquittal suffers from no infirmity or illegality. (11). Before disposing of the contentions raised by the rival parties, it is just and proper that the evidence of the prosecution may be summarized. (12). P.W. 2 Kum. (11). Before disposing of the contentions raised by the rival parties, it is just and proper that the evidence of the prosecution may be summarized. (12). P.W. 2 Kum. Shanti has stated that she was despatched by her mother to bring the stair-case from the house of accused and she went to the enclosure of the accused who was present there. The accused was wearing a ``Tahmad. When she enquired about the stair-case, he directed her towards the `dudh (room) situated in the enclosure. She entered the room. As soon as she reached near the stair-case lying there, accused came from behind in the room and he caught her in his stretched arms. She was felled on the ground. She attempted to push him and also shouted. The accused untied the string of her `Salvar and made her naked and he lay over her in a naked position. She struggled to push him away. The accused wanted to forcibly commit sexual intercourse with her to which she was attempting to resist. Hearing her cries, Ram Kumar and Girdhari came there and they pushed away the accused lying over her. She narrated this incident to both of them. She was told by them to go to her mother and narrate this incident to her. She left both of them as well as accused Bhura Ram there in the room and she went to her house. On reaching her house, she narrated the whole incident to her mother. She also stated that while scuffling, her `salvar was torn at two or three places. She further stated that she received injuries on her cheek, back, elbow etc. Her father Mohar Singh was out of village who returned after 5-7 days. Thereafter, she was medically examined. She maintained that she was never a consenting or a willing party for commission of sexual intercourse by the accused. She also stated that she received injuries because she was felled on the rough ground. The accused caused scratches of nails on her cheek. She has admitted that she had stated before the police while her Ex. D. 1 statement under Section 161, Cr.P.C. was being recor- ded, that she did not receive any injury while she was resisting the alleged act of the accused. However, now she has stated that she had received injuries, as above. She has admitted that she had stated before the police while her Ex. D. 1 statement under Section 161, Cr.P.C. was being recor- ded, that she did not receive any injury while she was resisting the alleged act of the accused. However, now she has stated that she had received injuries, as above. She has tried to give an explanation that since she felt shy of narrating this fact before the police, she did not disclose that she had received any injury. She has further clearly admitted that she even did not show all these injuries during the next five or six days before she was examined vide Ex. P.1 M.L.R. by P.W. 1 Dr. S.N. Vyas, to her mother. She has further admitted that the Investigating Officer, recording her statement Ex. D. 1, pointedly enquired from her about the injury existing on her cheek but she did not state that the accused, any how, caused this injury. She also stated that there were residential houses of the villagers on all the four corners of the enclosure whereat the alleged incident took place. She further stated that the `kund whereat both Girdhari as well as Ram Kumar were working, as above, was situated at about a distance of only 20 paces from the gate of the enclosure of the accused. She also admitted that while she entered the enclosure of Bhura Ram, both Ram Kumar and Girdhari were working at the site who were also visible from the gate of the enclosure of the accused. (13). She has also admitted that Ram Kumar and Girdhari were sons of her real uncle. Her mother as well as mother of the two witnesses are sisters. P.W. 6 Chhatu Ram is also her real uncle. She further stated that she was taken by Chhatu Ram to the police station after she was medically examined. (14). P.W. 1 Dr. Vyas has stated that he examined injuries of Kum. Shanti vide Ex. P. 1 M.L.R. on 16.2.76 and found as many as seven injuries on her person. (15). As a result of above evidence, it is clear that the `salvar was untied and the accused was allegedly lying naked over Kum. Shanti who was also made to lie in a naked position. She was not examined in regard to her age and the commission of sexual intercourse, if any. (15). As a result of above evidence, it is clear that the `salvar was untied and the accused was allegedly lying naked over Kum. Shanti who was also made to lie in a naked position. She was not examined in regard to her age and the commission of sexual intercourse, if any. Not only this, she had hidden all these injuries alleged to have been received at the time of the incident, further explaining that the accused was forcibly lying on Kum. Shanti and acts of her resistance came in contact with the rough surface as well as stonepebbles etc. at the place of the occurrence and so injuries were received. She did not, as was most natural, disclose all these injuries before her mother and even did not explain the visible injury on her cheek. As is her admission, she was not accompanied by either Girdhari or Ram Kumar to her mother. None had gone to lodge report with the police and instead since Saddique Mohd., A.S.I., as is the prosecution story, happe- ned to pass from the village and finding some suspected activities going on, interrogated Ram Kumar to give him Ex. P. 8 statement. However, neither Kum. Shanti nor her mother P.W. 4 Bobadi lodged any complaint before Saddique Mohd. (16). P.W. 4 Bobadi has stated that she had sent Kum. Shanti to fetch stair-case and, after returning, she was told by Kum. Shanti that while she went inside the room to pick up stair-case, accused caught her by his arms and felled her on the ground and attempted to commit sexual intercourse with her, but he did not succeed. She also stated that the police, as is also statement of P.W. 15 Saddique Mohd., seized the `salvar allegedly worn by Kum. Shanti at the time of the alleged occurrence. She has clearly stated, though Kum. Shanti does not support it, that she saw injuries and bruises on both cheeks of Kum. Shanti on the same day. She enquired about the same but Kum. Shanti did not explain those injuries. She has further stated that she had seen other multiple injuries on her body but she was not got medically examined before 16.2.76, as above. (17). Shanti does not support it, that she saw injuries and bruises on both cheeks of Kum. Shanti on the same day. She enquired about the same but Kum. Shanti did not explain those injuries. She has further stated that she had seen other multiple injuries on her body but she was not got medically examined before 16.2.76, as above. (17). P.W. 10 Girdhari stated that while he was working at his `kund along with P.W. 11 Ram Kumar, they heard the cries from the side of the enclosure of the accused and both of them went there running and they found that Kum. Shanti, was lying on the ground and the accused was lying over her and holding her in his arms. He has stated that the `salvar was pushed towards the lower portion of the body and she was lying naked. He has further stated that both of them picked up and removed Bhura Ram who was lying over Kum. Shanti. He has also stated that Kum. Shanti narrated the story, as above. He has emphatically maintained that the `salvar was in the legs and the same was not removed from her body. He also stated that the accused had fled away from there before the incident was narrated to them by Kum. Shanti. While she was narrating story, P.W. 6 Chhatu Ram and P.W. 12 Lal Man had also come there. Thereafter, Chhatu Ram had also left for his house. (18). It is to be appreciated that all these witnesses are closely related to Kum. Shanti and, as per the version of Kum. Shanti as well as Girdhari, none had accompanied Kum. Shanti to her house. He has further stated that, meanwhile, they went to the house of Mohar Singh and they talked Smt. Bobadi and the whole story was narrated to her. (19). P.W. 11 Ram Kumar also stated that they were so working at their `kund and after hearing cries, they went to the place of occurrence and finding the accused-respondent lying naked over Kum. Shanti, they pushed the doors of the gate inside and found that the accused was attempting to commit sexual intercour- se with her. Contrary to the statement of Girdhari, he stated that no sooner they entered the room, the accused immediately stood up and seized the opportunity to have run away from there. They enquired from Kum. Shanti, they pushed the doors of the gate inside and found that the accused was attempting to commit sexual intercour- se with her. Contrary to the statement of Girdhari, he stated that no sooner they entered the room, the accused immediately stood up and seized the opportunity to have run away from there. They enquired from Kum. Shanti as to why had she gone there, on which she represented that she had gone there to fetch a stair-case. He also stated that Kum. Shanti left for her house and, as also stated by Girdhari in the meantime, Amar Singh, brother of the accused-respondent, also appeared on the scene and he challenged as to why were they levelling false allegations against his brother and he picked up a quarrel with them. Thereafter, they returned to their house. In the meantime, they saw the jeep of the police passing from there and he intercepted the same and, lastly, Ex. P.8 report was lodged by him, as is also corro- borated by Saddique Mohd. He has clearly stated that from the place of occurrence, they straightway gone to their own house and did not go to the house of Mohar Singh before Ex. P.8 statement was given to the police. He has contradicted the statement of Girdhari while stating that neither Chhatu Ram nor Lal Man were present at the time of narration of the incident by Kum. Shanti after she had come out of the room whereat she was allegedly being molested by the accused-respondent. He has further stated that they had turned up only after Kum. Shanti left from there. The presence of Lal Man and Chhatu Ram is clearly omitted in Ex. P. 8 and there is no acceptable reason therefor. (20). As stated above, it is to be appreciated that Kum. Shanti was conducting in a manner that the injuries alleged to have been received by her were not known to anybody. She also stated that she was made to lie naked on the ground and the accused after removing his `tahmad, lay over her in a naked position. She has fur- ther maintained that accused never succeeded in inserting his male-organ into her vagina and, as is stated by her, the accused never succeeded in committing the act of sexual intercourse with her. Had the accused as well as Kum. She has fur- ther maintained that accused never succeeded in inserting his male-organ into her vagina and, as is stated by her, the accused never succeeded in committing the act of sexual intercourse with her. Had the accused as well as Kum. Shanti being naked and she would have been felled on the ground and she was unwilling and non-consenting party and was resisting the acts of the accused, as is her statement, there was no obstruction against the accused in having succeeded to insert his male-organ into her vagina and thereby committing the act of sexual intercourse with her. She could not have otherwise received injuries on her cheek as well. However, neither the Investigating Officer nor the parents of Kum. Shanti subjected her to medical examination to either establish or to disprove the fact of commission of actual sexual intercourse by the accused. Neither Girdhari nor Ram Kumar, having regard to the statements of P.W. 2 Kum. Shanti as well as P.W. 4 Smt. Bobadi and Ex. P. 8 report lodged by Ram Kumar, accompanied Kum. Shanti to her mother. It was quite unnatural, in case it is so believed, to send Kum. Shanti alone to the enclosure of the accused to fetch stair-case. When she reached the enclosure of the accused, whereat he was present, naturally, since the place of `kund whereat Girdhari and Ram Kumar were filling the fertilizer of sulphate into the bags, to have noticed Kum. Shanti entering the enclosure of the accused in suspicious circumstances and, therefore, it was most natural for them to have suspected some thing foul and, therefore, they surreptitiously reached the room of the accused which was alleged to have been closed and on pushing the same, they found accused, as stated above, lying naked on Kum. Shanti who was also lying naked on the ground. (21). As a result, since Girdhari as well as Ram Kumar, as per their own version, did not accompany Kum. Shanti, in case she was forcibly subjected to any such molestation and assault and she was asked to go to her house and, accordin- gly, without shouting and weeping she straightway went to her mother. (22). In the fact and circumstances narrated above, there is no evidence to hold that Kum. Shanti, in case she was forcibly subjected to any such molestation and assault and she was asked to go to her house and, accordin- gly, without shouting and weeping she straightway went to her mother. (22). In the fact and circumstances narrated above, there is no evidence to hold that Kum. Shanti was aged less than 16 years at the time of the alleged occurrence and she has not been medically examined in respect of her age which was incumbent on the medical officer as well as Investigating Officer specially when even P.W. 4 Smt. Bobadi and P.W. 5 Mohar Singh have also not stated the age of Kum. Shanti to be less than 16 years. There is no proof of age of Kum. Shanti to hold that she was certainly below 16 years of age at the time of the incident. Besides, her medical examination was delayed and that too was carried out after five days of the occurrence and the same is also incomplete in regard to commis- sion of sexual intercourse which was, in case such an incident ever did take place, unavoidable and most natural. Had her cries been heard by Girdhari and Ram Kumar before they reached the place of occurrence, it was most natural on their part to have sighted from the place from where they started for the place of occurrence as well as while they were entering the enclosure of the accused and that being so, it was most impossible for the accused to have been lying over Kum. Shanti till the closed doors of the gate of the room were pushed and opened and the accused was found lying over Kum. Shanti. Girdhari has gone to the extent of even stating that they caught hold of the accused lying over Smt. Shanti and removed him. This is most unnatural. If this part of the statement is believed, they must have suspected the arrival of Kum. Shanti at the place of the occurrence under suspicious circumstances and, finding that she had not returned from there, they went unnoticed to the room of the accused and, giving them surprise, they entered the room where they found both Kum. Shanti as well as accused in a compromising position or otherwise but, as they were real cousins (brothers) of Kum. Shanti as well as accused in a compromising position or otherwise but, as they were real cousins (brothers) of Kum. Shanti, they had every reason to be annoyed and aggrieved and, therefore, they objected against the act of the accused-respondent to which the brother of the accused-respondent also challenged. Kum. Shanti was asked to go to her mother immediately. As a result, none from the side of the family members of Kum. Shanti came forward or went to the police but, instead, Ram Kumar seized the opportunity of lodging Ex. P. 8 report before the Police and as a result, the police came into action and Ex. P. 9 F.I.R. was registered. Naturally, as it does appear from the circumstance borne out of the prosecution evidence, as has been critically analysed and summarized by the learned trial Court as well, that the prosecution, as unfolded by P.W. 10 Gir- dhari and P.W. 11 Ram Kumar besides P.W. 2 Kum. Shanti along with P.W. 4 Smt. Bobadi, suffers from intrinsic weaknesses and improbabilities and their statements also run counter to their police statements as well as their inter se statement during the trial and, therefore, looking to the most unnatural conduct of Kum. Shanti as well as the contradictory conduct and evidence of Ram Kumar and Girdhari, besi- des the statement of P.W. 4 Smt. Bobadi, the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable manner of doubt that the accused had caught hold of her and assaulted Kum. Shanti without her consent and against her will and that he attempted to commit any sexual intercourse as is defined under Section 375, I.P.C. (23). Kum. Shanti had gone to a lonely enclosure of the accused all alone to fetch stair-case. She even did not take assistance of either Girdhari or Ram Kumar who are found to have been working at the place situated near the place of occurrence. She went to the accused, as far as possible unnoticed from her side to the accused and conversed with him and, lastly, as is her version, she entered alone in the room of the accused. It is also not alleged that she had caused any in- jury to the accused. In view of this fact, her reluctance to disclose her alleged injuries, as are noted in Ex. P. 1, to her mother as well as before P.W. 15 Saddique Mohd. It is also not alleged that she had caused any in- jury to the accused. In view of this fact, her reluctance to disclose her alleged injuries, as are noted in Ex. P. 1, to her mother as well as before P.W. 15 Saddique Mohd. at the time of recording her statement Ex. D. 1 and so also her natural reluctance about the commission of any sexual intercourse. On the face of her statement, two of the real cousins having suddenly appeared on the scene of occu- rrence, as is also contended by the defence side, the possibility also cannot be excluded that she, of her own volition, had gone to the accused and thereafter both of them, entered the room and they were either under the process or on the verge of commission of sexual intercourse with their mutual consent and willingness. (24). Besides, as is also discussed by the learned trail Judge, on the basis of evidence of D.W. 1 D. S. Grewal, Officer Commanding, M.T. Workshop, Faridkot as well as D.W. 2 Bawa Singh, Sub- Inspector and D.W. 3 Joga Singh, the accused-respondent was present at Faridkot at the workshop whereat the accused and his associates had gone to deposit empty (used) cartridges belonging to the 41 Bn BSF with whom the accused was serving at the relevant time and that the accused was present there at Faridkot on 10.2.76 and dates preceding thereto and subsequent to the same. They are responsible officers and besides, on the basis of the relevant record, they have shown that the accused was taking his meals at the mess of the workshop and that he was physically present there at the time of the occurrence and, therefore, on 10.2.76 when the alleged occurrence is alleged to have taken place as per the prosecution story, the accused could not have been, at the same time, present at his village. The accused did not take any leave and, therefore, it is difficult to believe, on the face of contradictory and highly interested evidence adduced by the prosecution side to hold that the accused had deserted the Battalion and instead he had gone to his village and had it been so, he could not have been desperate enough to even then physically assault Kum. Shanti against her wish and without her consent. (25). Shanti against her wish and without her consent. (25). Though, once the prosecution proved beyond reasonable manner of doubt that the accused was present at the scene of occurrence and he was the per- petrator of the commission of the alleged offence the burden shifts on the accused that he was not present at the place of occurrence and, instead, he was present at some other place and it was physically impossible to be present at both the places on the same day of the occurrence, yet, as is held by the learned trial Judge and also stated by D.Ws. D.S. Grewal, Bawa Singh and Joga Singh, since there is ample evidence to hold that the accused was present at Faridkot on the date of the occurrence and days preceding and following the same and looking to the nature of the prosecution evidence, discussed above, presently, since this occurrence is alleged to have taken place on 10.2.76 and a period of about 21 years has passed since then, in the facts and circumstances discussed above, this is not a fit case wherein interference of this appellate Court is called for to disturb the impugned finding of not guilty passed in favour of the accused, lastly, resulting in his acquittal of the offence charged with. (26). As a result of above discussion, in the aforesaid circumstances, there is no compelling and overwhelming evidence to disturb the impugned finding of ac- quittal of the accused and, therefore, there is no merit in this appeal. (27). In the result, this appeal is dismissed and the impugned judgment and order of acquittal of the accused from the offence punishable under Section 376/511, I.P.C. is affirmed. He is on bail. His bail bonds are cancelled. _