JUDGMENT R.L. Khurana, J.—The appellant, hereinafter referred to as the accused, stands convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Hamirpur, in Sessions case No. 11 of 1994 vide judgment dated 25.7.1995 for the offence under Section 376, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs. 5,000/-. Out of the amount of fine, if paid by the accused, a sum of Rs. 3,000/- has been ordered to be paid to the prosecutrix Kumari Anju. In default of payment of fine, the accused has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year. 2. The prosecution story, briefly, may be thus stated. The prosecutrix PW 4 Km. Anju is residing with her mother in village Buhli Loharwin, Tehsil Barsar, District Hamirpur. Her father, Pritam Chand, is working as a Confectioner in Delhi. In the year 1993, she was of about 10 ye£rs of age and was a student of Class-IV. 3. On 20.12.1993, at about 7.30 a.m., the prosecutrix, Km. Anju? had gone out in a "Ghasni" to ease herself. After having answered the call of nature, when she had just tied the waist-band of her salwar, the accused came there. He pushed her as a result of which she fell down. The accused then lifted her and carried her a little ahead. He, thereafter, made her lie on the ground and committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. The prosecutrix had cried in pain. After the rape, the accused threatened her with death in case she dared to narrate the occurrence to anyone. 4. On reaching home, the prosecutrix, while weeping, narrated the entire occurrence to her mother PW 5, Smt. Kamla Devi, who also noticed swelling on the private part of the prosecutrix. There was bleeding. She also noticed blood-stains on the salwar of the prosecutrix. Not realising the importance of such blood-stains, she happened to wash the salwar. PW 5 did not disclose the occurrence to anyone. Instead, she requested her brother-in-law (sisters husband), who was working in the Police Department, to send a telegram to her husband to come to the village immediately. She also noticed blood-stains on the salwar of the prosecutrix. Not realising the importance of such blood-stains, she happened to wash the salwar. PW 5 did not disclose the occurrence to anyone. Instead, she requested her brother-in-law (sisters husband), who was working in the Police Department, to send a telegram to her husband to come to the village immediately. Since her husband did not turnup, on 25.12.1993, she went to the police station, along with the prosecutrix, and a report about the occurrence was made at about 11.15 a.m. 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. 113/93 at Police Station, Badsar. 5. During the course of investigation, the prosecutrix was got medically examined by a Board of three lady doctors at Indira Gandhi Medical College and Hospital, at Shimla on 29.12.1993, at about 3.30 p.m. It was observed as under:— " 1. Multiple small linear abrasions over the left scapular region, medically brownish in colour with dried scab which at places is falling off. 2. Multiple small linear abrasions were also seen on the dorsal aspect of fore-arm brownish in colour with dried scab which at places is falling off. Breasts. The menarche had not started. External Genetalia No pubic hair present. No injury on the vulva. No redness or oedema over the vulva was present. No scratches or lacerations over the external genetalia. No discharge at vulva was present. Hymen. Hymen was intact except at 6 Oclock position whereas there was small laceration whose margins were red and irregular. No fresh bleeding was present. Fourchetta and perineum were intact. No spermatozoa was present." 6. The medical team which examined the prosecutrix gave the opinion that the hymen was lacerated. No definite opinion was given whether the laceration of hymen was due to sexual assault or otherwise. 7. Upon radiological examination by PW 2, Dr. Mrs. Asha Negi, the bony age of the prosecutrix was opined to be between 10 to 14-1/2 years. 8. The accused was also subjected to medical examination. Though, he was found capable of performing sexual intercourse, no injuries were found on his person including the private part. 9. On having been put to trial, the accused pleaded not guility. Mrs. Asha Negi, the bony age of the prosecutrix was opined to be between 10 to 14-1/2 years. 8. The accused was also subjected to medical examination. Though, he was found capable of performing sexual intercourse, no injuries were found on his person including the private part. 9. On having been put to trial, the accused pleaded not guility. His defence is that of false implication on account of some quarrel alleged to have taken place between his mother and PW 5 Smt. Kamla Devi, the mother of the prosecutrix. The accused has also come up with the defence of alibi and he has put up the defence that on the relevant date, he was not present in the village but was at Amritsar. One witness has been examined by the accused in his defence. 10. The learned Sessions Judge, upon consideration of the material placed before him, convicted and sentenced the accused as aforesaid. 11. At the very outset, it may be stated that the fact that the prosecutrix Km. Anju was below the age of 16 years at the relevant time, has not been disputed by the accused. As stated above, the bony age of the prosecutrix upon radiological examination was opined by PW 2, Dr. (Mrs.) Asha Negi, to be between 1 to 14-1/2 years. The birth entry Ex. PH records the date of birth of the prosecutrix is 7.9.1982. The same date of birth is recorded in the school leaving certificate Ex. PJ. On the basis of Ex. PH and Ex. PJ, the prosecutrix was of about 11 years and three months of age at the time of the alleged occurrence. 12. The learned Counsel for the accused has contended that there was a delay of about five days in lodging the report to the police and since such delay has remained unexplained, the same is fatal to the prosecution case. 13. The occurrence in the present case, as per the prosecution story, had taken place at about 7.30 a.m. on 20.12.1993. The report to the police was made on 25.12.1993, at about 11.30 a.m. P.W. 5, Smt. Kamla Devi, the mother of the prosecutrix, has explained the delay in the following words:— ".......On account of shame I did not go anywhere for 2/3 days. The report to the police was made on 25.12.1993, at about 11.30 a.m. P.W. 5, Smt. Kamla Devi, the mother of the prosecutrix, has explained the delay in the following words:— ".......On account of shame I did not go anywhere for 2/3 days. Then my Behnoee Kishori Lal, who is in the Police Department, came there and I requested him to send a telegram to my husband that there is an urgent work, therefore, he should come. I came to know later on that Kishori Lal did not send the telegram, but he left for his duty the same day. The telegraph office is at Mehra and the bus fare is Rs. 4/-. On 25.12.1993, I reported the matter to the police. I had taken Anju with me to the police station Badsar. The FIR is EX. PE, which bears my signatures. I had narrated the entire incident. While returning from police station, I gave a telephonic message to my husband from Mehra village. He reached in the village on 26.12.1993..." 14. During the course of cross-examination, she has further stated that though the house of her "Jeth" (husbands elder brother) adjoins her house, she did not disclose the occurrence even to him due to shame. 15. Dealing with the question of delay in making the report to the police in respect of the offence of rape, the Honble Supreme Court in Karnel Singh v. State of M.R, [(1995) 5 SCC 518], has held:— ".......In India women are slow and hesitant to complain of such assaults and if the prosecutrix happens to be a married person, she will not do anything without informing her husband. Merely because the complaint was lodged less than promptly does not raise the inference that the complaint was false. The reluctance to go to the police is because of societys attitude towards such women, it casts doubt and shame upon her rather than comfort and sympathies with her. Therefore, delay in lodging complaints in such cases does not necessarily indicate that her version is false...." 16. As stated above, the prosecutrix was only of about 11 years of age. Her honour and future marriage prospects were at stake. Therefore, delay in lodging complaints in such cases does not necessarily indicate that her version is false...." 16. As stated above, the prosecutrix was only of about 11 years of age. Her honour and future marriage prospects were at stake. Therefore, it was natural for PW 5 Smt. Kamla Devi to consult her husband, who was gainfully employed at Delhi, and for this purpose she had requested Kishori Lal, her brother-in-law (sisters husband) to send a telegram to her husband to return home immediately. Since her husband did not return as no telegram was sent to him by Kishori Lal, she ultimately lodged the report on 25.12.1993. 17. The fact that PW 5 was concerned about the honour of her daughter and her own family is also evident from the fact that she did not talk about the occurrence either to her "Jeth" (husbands brother), who lives nearby or to Kishori Lal, her sisters husband, who himself was serving in the Police Department. She requested Kishori Lal to send a telegram to her husband to return home immediately, as there was some urgent work. 18. Therefore, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Sessions Judge has rightly held that the delay is not fatal and the same stands duly and properly explained. 19. The learned Counsel for the accused next contended that absence of injuries on the person of the accused belies the rape. It was contended that taking into consideration the age of the prosecutrix, in case of rape some injuries especially on the private part of the accused were bound to be sustained. In support of his contention, the learned Counsel has placed reliance on the ratio laid down by the Honble Supreme Court in Rahim Beg and another v. State of U.R, [(1972 (3) S.C.C. 759]. 20. The question as to the effect of absence of injuries on the private part of the accused again came up for consideration by the Honble Supreme Court in State of Himachal Pradesh v. Baghubir Singh, [1993 (2) Shim. L.J. 1418]. It was held:— "Dr. Ghatate, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent submitted, by reference to Rahim Beg and another v. State of U.R, 1972 (3) SCC 759, that the absence of injuries on the penis of the respondent should be treated as sufficient to negative the prosecution case. We are afraid we cannot agree. L.J. 1418]. It was held:— "Dr. Ghatate, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent submitted, by reference to Rahim Beg and another v. State of U.R, 1972 (3) SCC 759, that the absence of injuries on the penis of the respondent should be treated as sufficient to negative the prosecution case. We are afraid we cannot agree. Inference have to be drawn in every case from the given set of facts and circumstances. There is no inflexible axiom of law which lays down that the absence of injuries on the male organ of the accused would always be fatal to the prosecution case and would discredit the evidence of the prosecutrix, otherwise found to be reliable. The presence of injuries on the male organ may lend support to the prosecution case, but their absence is not always fatal. Rahim Begs case (supra) was based on its pecular facts and the observations made therein were in a totally different context and cannot advance the case of the respondent. The observations in Rahim Begs case (supra) cannot be mechanically pressed into aid in every case regardless of the specific circumstances of the cirme and absence of the fact situtation as existing in that case. Every case has to be approached with realistic diversity based on peculiar facts and circumstances of that case." 21. Though PW 1 Dr. (Ms. ) Ritu Sareen, who had examined the prosecutrix, has stated that no definite opinion could be given as to the cause of laceration of the hymen of 6 Oclock position, in the absence of anything to the contrary as to the cause of such injury, it can be simply concluded that such injury was as a result of sexual assault. No suggestion was given even to PW 1 as to the other possible cause(s) for such injury. PW 1 has admitted that at the time of medical examination, the prosecutrix had given the history of having been raped and the same was recorded in the medical certificate Ex. PA. 22. The fact that the hymen of the prosecutrix was found intact (except for the laceration found at 6 Oclock position) would not belie the case of rape. For the offence of rape to be committed it is not necessary that there should be complete penetration. PA. 22. The fact that the hymen of the prosecutrix was found intact (except for the laceration found at 6 Oclock position) would not belie the case of rape. For the offence of rape to be committed it is not necessary that there should be complete penetration. Partial penetration within the labia majora of the vulva or pudendum with or without emission of semen is quite sufficient in law. In the case of girls below the age of 12 years, contusion in labia majora, that is an injury to tissues caused by blunt force, which did not disrupt or lacerate from surface is the evidence of penetration. [See: Das Bernard v. State, 1974 Cr. L.J. 1098]. 23. In Madan Gopal Kakkad v. Naval Dubey and another, [(1992) 3 SCC 204], the prosecutrix was of about 8 years of age. She was medically examined after 5 days of the occurrence. There was an abrasion on the medial side of labia majora and redness around labia minora. Hymen was intact. The medical officer opined that there was an attempt to rape. It was held that the above injuries show that there has been penetration of penis into the vagina and that even a slightest penetration of penis would constitute the offence of rape. 24. Before the prosecutrix was examined by a team of lady doctors at Shimla on 29.12.1993, she was first taken for medical examination to District Hospital, Una, on 25.12.1993 at about 12.30 p.m. Preliminary examination was carried out by PW 3, Dr. M.K. Pathak. Though no external injury was noticed by him in perineum around vulva, he had noticed tenderness around vulva. PW 3 had then referred the prosecutrix for medical examination by a Gynecologist. PW 3 was never cross-examined by the accused as to the cause of tenderness around vulva. The tenderness around vulva must have disappeared by 29.12.1993 when the prosecutrix came to be examined at Shimla by a team of lady doctors of which PW 1 was one of the members. 25. The accused also cannot take the absence of the spermatozoa in the vaginal smear which was taken after about 9 days of the occurrence. In State of Maharashtra v. Chandraprakash Kewalchand Jain, [(1990) 1 SCC 550], it has been held that absence of semen or spermatozoa in the vaginal smear and slides taken about 24 hours of the incident is not fatal. 26. In State of Maharashtra v. Chandraprakash Kewalchand Jain, [(1990) 1 SCC 550], it has been held that absence of semen or spermatozoa in the vaginal smear and slides taken about 24 hours of the incident is not fatal. 26. It was further contended on behalf of the accused that absence of extensive injuries on the person of the prosecutrix also belies the rape. As stated above, only minor injuries in the form of multiple small linear abrasions were found on the left scapular region and dorsal aspect of the fore-arm of the prosecutrix. 27. PW 1 Dr. Ms. Ritu Sareen has categorically stated that such injuries could be caused on the rough surface due to sexual assault. 28. It is not a universal rule that whenever resistance is offered by a victim of rape, she must suffer injuries on her person. The prosecutrix was only of about 11 years of age while the accused was an adult. Therefore, keeping in view of the age of the prosecutrix, much resistance could not have been shown and exerted by her. Therefore, absence of extensive injuries on the person of the prosecutrix cannot be said to be fatal to the case. 29. The Honble Supreme Court in State of Maharashtra v. Priya Sharan Maharaj and others, [(1997) 4 SCC 393], has held that in the absence of extensive injuries on the person of the prosecutrix, her version cannot be described as false on that ground alone. 30. The learned Counsel for the accused has further contended that the accused was falsely implicated. The defence set up by the accused in his statement recorded under Section 313, Code of Criminal Procedure, in answer to question No. 15 is in the following terms:— "Kamla had a quarrel with my mother and she after coming to my house had said that she would not allow me to earn my livelihood." 31. However, while leading defence evidence the accused had come up with the defence of alibi in order to show that on the day of alleged occurrence he was at Amritsar 32. It is well established principle of law that alibi must be proved by cogent and specific evidence. The evidence led by the accused is not reliable. DW 1, the alleged employer of the accused though has stated that he is maintaining the attendance register, has not produced the same. It is well established principle of law that alibi must be proved by cogent and specific evidence. The evidence led by the accused is not reliable. DW 1, the alleged employer of the accused though has stated that he is maintaining the attendance register, has not produced the same. From the evidence coming on record, the accused has not been able to prove and establish his alibi. 33. Besides, it is not possible to believe that the prosecutrix and her mother would allow the real culprit to escape and falsely involve the accused without any sufficient and cogent reasons. 34. At this stage, it would be pertinent to quote the observations made by the Honble Supreme Court in Bharwada Bhoginbai Hirajibhai v. State of Gujarat, [(1983) 3 SCC 217], which were quoted with approval in State of Maharashtra v. Chandraprakash Kewalchand Jain, [(1990) 1 SCC 550]:— “......Without the fear of making too wide a statement, or of overstating the case, it can be said that rarely will a girl or a woman in India make false allegations of sexual asault.....The statement is generally true in the context of the urban as also rural society. It is also by and large true in the context of the sophisticated, not so sophisticated, and unsophisticated society. Only very rarely can one conceivably come across an exception or two and that woo possibly from amongst the urban elites. Because (1) A girl or a woman in the tradition-bound non-permissive society of India would be extremely reluctant even to admit that any incident which is likely to reflect on her chastity had ever occurred. (2) She would be conscious of the danger of being ostracised by the society or being looked down by the society including by her own family members, relatives, friends and neighbours. (3) She would have to brave the whole world. (4) She would face the risk of losing the love and respect of her own husband and near relatives, and of her matrimonial home and happiness being shattered. (5) If she is unmarried, she would apprehend that it would be difficult to secure an alliance with a suitable match from a respectable or an acceptable family. (6) It would almost inevitably and almost invariably result in mental torture and suffering to herself. (7) The fear of being taunted by others will always haunt her. (5) If she is unmarried, she would apprehend that it would be difficult to secure an alliance with a suitable match from a respectable or an acceptable family. (6) It would almost inevitably and almost invariably result in mental torture and suffering to herself. (7) The fear of being taunted by others will always haunt her. (8) She would feel extremely embarrassed in relating the incident to others being overpowered by a feeling of shame on account of the upbringing in a tradition-bound society where by and large sex is taboo. (9) The natural inclination would be to avoid giving publicity to the incident lest the family name and family honour is brought into controversy. (10) The parents of an unmarried girl is also the husband and members of the husbands family of a married woman, would also more often than not, want to avoid publicity on account of the fear of social stigma on the family name and family honour. (11) The fear of the victim herself being considered to be promiscuous or in some way responsible for the incident regardless of her innocence. (12) The reluctance to face interrogation by the investigating agency, to face the Court, to face the cross-examination by Counsel for the culprit, and the risk of being disbelieved, acts as a deterrent." 35. Analysing the evidence coming on the record, it can be safely concluded that the ocular account of the incident given by the prosecutrix PW 4 Kumari Anju, which stands corroborated by the medical evidence, does not suffer from any basic infirmity and the probabilities factor does not render it unworthy of reliance and credence. 36. The accused, therefore, stands rightly convicted and sentenced by the learned Trial Court and there is absolutely no reason for interference therewith. 37. Resultantly, the appeal is dismissed. The conviction and sentence are maintained. The accused who is on bail pursuant to the order of this Court is directed to surrender himself to his bail bonds before the learned trial court within four weeks from today and to receive and serve out the sentence imposed upon him. On his failure to do so, the learned trial court shall commit the accused to jail by issuance of non-bailable warrants against him. Appeal dismissed.