JUDGMENT R.L. Khurana, J.—The appellant, Vijander Singh, hereinafter referred to as the accused stands convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Shimla, in Sessions Trial No. 36-S/7 of 1997 for the offence under Section 376, Indian Penal Code, vide judgment dated 9.11. 1998 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-. In default of payment of fine, he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are these. The prosecutrix Kumari Savitri, daughter of Bhajan Dass, is a resident of village Khabal Tehsil Chirgaon, District Shimla. The accused is also a resident of the said village. On 20.8.1996 at about 5 p.m., the prosecutrix had gone to the field of her maternal uncle to fetch grass. It was raining at that time. Having moved the grass, she kept the same in a "Kilta" (basket). When she was preparing to return home and was fixing the "Kilta” on her shoulders, the accused all of a sudden appeared at the scene. He pushed the "Kilta” aside and thereafter by holding the prosecutrix tightly in his arms, he threw her on the ground. He lowered his pant and her salwar and subjected her to forcible sexual intercourse. The prosecutrix though cried for help, such cries could not be heard by anyone due to rain. The accused after having committed the sexual intercourse ran away from the scene. The prosecutrix on reaching home narrated the occurrence to her mother who in turn informed her father and uncle (fathers brother). On the following day, the prosecutrix accompanied by her uncle proceeded towards the police station for making the report. However, she happened to meet the police at Tikkri and she lodged the report on the basis of which the present case came to be registered vide FIR No. 172 of 1996. 3. During the investigation of the case, the prosecutrix was subjected to medical examination. Such examination revealed that she was subjected to sexual intercourse recently. 4. The accused was arrested, challaned and sent up for trial. He pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. His defence is that of denial. 3. During the investigation of the case, the prosecutrix was subjected to medical examination. Such examination revealed that she was subjected to sexual intercourse recently. 4. The accused was arrested, challaned and sent up for trial. He pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. His defence is that of denial. He has pleaded that he has been falsely implicated on account of enmity for two reasons, namely, he, his father and other family members had campaigned for the rival candidate during the Panchayat elections in which elections, paternal uncle of the prosecutrix was a candidate, and, that during the childhood of the accused and the prosecutrix, there was an understanding between their parents that they would be married to each other on becoming of marriagable age, but the accused on attaining adulthood had refused to marry the prosecutrix. 5. Seven witnesses were examined by the prosecution to bring home the offence against the accused. No defence was led by the accused. The learned Sessions Judge, upon consideration of the material placed before him has convicted and sentenced the accused as aforesaid. 6. While assailing the conviction and sentence imposed upon the accused, the learned Counsel for the accused at the very outset raised an objection that though double record of evidence was maintained by the learned trial Court, that is, in English and Hindi, there is a vast difference in the prosecution story in the two English and Hindi records of evidence. He further contended that Hindi being the Court language of all the courts subordinate to the High Court in the State of Himachal Pradesh, reliance will have to be placed on the Hindi record of evidence. 7. Chapter XXIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the Code) deals with "Evidence in inquiries and trials." Section 276 provides for maintenance of the record in trials before Court of Session. It reads :— "276. Record in trial before Court of Session.—(1) In all trials before a Court of Session, the evidence of each witness shall, as his examination proceeds, be taken down in writing either by the Presiding Judge himself or by his dictation in open Court or, under his direction and superintendence, by an officer of the Court appointed by him in this behalf. (2) Such evidence shall ordinarily be taken down in the form of a narrative, but the Presiding Judge may, in his discretion, take down, or cause to be taken down, any part of such evidence in the form of question and answer. (3) The evidence so taken down shall be signed by the Presiding Judge and shall form part of the record." Section 277 of the Code provides for the language of record of evidence. It reads:— "277. Language of record of evidence.—In every case where evidence is taken down under Section 275 or Section 276:— (a) if the witness gives evidence in the language of the Court, it shall be taken down in that language; (b) if he gives evidence in any other language, it may, if practicable, be taken down in that language, and if it is not practicable to do so, a true translation of the evidence in the language of the Court shall be prepared as the examination of the witness proceeds, signed by the Magistrate or Presiding Judge, and shall form part of the record; (c) where under clause (b) evidence is taken down in a language other than the language of the Court, a true translation thereof in the language of the Court shall be prepared as soon as practicable, signed by the Magistrate or Presiding Judge, and shall form part of the record : Provided that when under clause (b) evidence is taken down in English and a translation thereof in the language of the Court is not required by any of the parties. The Court may dispense with such translation." Clause (a) of Section 277, quoted above, stipulates that if the witness gives evidence in the language of the Court, it shall be taken down in that language. 8. Admittedly, the prosecutrix as PW 3 her mother as PW 4 and her uncle as PW 5 had given evidence in Hindi. Such evidence was recorded in English under the dictation of the Presiding Officer. In addition, Hindi version of such evidence was recorded by the Court Reader. The first question which arises for determination is: what is the language of the Court? Section 272 of the Code which deals with language of the Courts within the State other than the High Court, provides:— "272. In addition, Hindi version of such evidence was recorded by the Court Reader. The first question which arises for determination is: what is the language of the Court? Section 272 of the Code which deals with language of the Courts within the State other than the High Court, provides:— "272. Language of Courts.—The State Government may determine what shall be, for purposes of this Code, the language of each Court within the State other than the High Court." Vide notification No. 69 (243) 4-J-62/42280 dated 28.9.1962 issued by the Government of Punjab, it has been declared that the language of the Courts subordinate to or within the jurisdiction of the High Court of the then High Court of Punjab shall be "Hindi" in Devnagri script in Hindi region and “Punjabi” in Gurmukhi script in Punjab region. Such notification does not appear to have been superseded, modified, altered or amended by the Government of Himachal Pradesh after re-organisation of the States in the year 1966. The result is that in all those areas of erstwhile Punjab which came to be merged in Himachal Pradesh in the year 1966, Hindi is the language of all the Courts subordinate to the High Court. 9. The present case pertains to Rohru Sub-Division of District Shimla which area, admittedly, was a part of Himachal Pradesh even prior to re-organisation of the States in the year 1966. No notification under Section 272 of the Code appears to have been issued at any time by the Government of Himachal Pradesh determing the language of the Courts subordinate to the High Court. 10. Under Chapter I, Part-N Volume-I of the Punjab High Court Rules and Orders, which has been adopted for application to the old areas of Himachal Pradesh vide notification dated 20.6.1950, "Hindi" in Devnagri script has been made the language of the courts subordinate to the High Court. Therefore, for all the subordinate courts in the State of Himachal Pradesh, the language of the court is "Hindi" in Devnagri script. 11. If language of the Court is "Hindi", then primarily the Hindi record of evidence has to be looked into. Therefore, I proceed to examine the case on the basis of such "Hindi" record of evidence. 12. Insofar as the age of the prosecutrix as on the relevant date is concerned, there is no dispute. 11. If language of the Court is "Hindi", then primarily the Hindi record of evidence has to be looked into. Therefore, I proceed to examine the case on the basis of such "Hindi" record of evidence. 12. Insofar as the age of the prosecutrix as on the relevant date is concerned, there is no dispute. Admittedly, she was above the age of 16 years and was capable of giving consent. 13. It is by now well settled that a woman who is a victim of sexual assault is not an accomplice to the crime lest a victim of another persons lust and, therefore, her evidence is not required to be tested with the same amount of suspicion as that of an accomplice. She is not in the category of a child witness or an accomplice and, therefore, the rule of prudence that her evidence must be corroborated in material particulars has no application. At the most, the Court may look for some evidence which lends assurance. (See: Karnel Singh v. State of M.P., (1995) 5 S.C.C. 518). 14. The prosecutrix Km. Savitri was medically examined by PW 6 Dr. Anita Sarkar at Community Health Centre, Chirgaon on 21.8.1996 at 11 a.m. The occurrence is alleged to have taken place on 20.8.1996 at about 5 p.m. The medical examination of the prosecutrix thus came to be carried out about 18 hours after the occurrence. PW 6 had observed as under:— “(i) Genitalia was well developed; (ii) Hair Public scanty. The prosecutrix had shaved her pubic hairs; (iii) No seminal stains were seen around genitalia or inner aspect of thigh; (iv) Labia majora was normal; (v) No injury was seen on genitalia or inner aspects of thigh; (vi) Hymen was not intact. Tags of hymen were seen around the vagina. Posterior hymen tear was present. No bleeding when hymen was touched; (vii) There was tenderness at the site of hymen tear; (viii) Vagina admitted two fingers; (ix) Enythema (redness) of vaginal wall was noticed.” PW 6 Dr. Anita Sarkar, on the basis of the above observations opined that the prosecutrix had been subjected to sexual intercourse in the recent past. 15. The prosecutrix, while appearing as PW 3, has categorically stated that on 20.8.1996 she had gone to the field of her uncle for fetching the grass. Anita Sarkar, on the basis of the above observations opined that the prosecutrix had been subjected to sexual intercourse in the recent past. 15. The prosecutrix, while appearing as PW 3, has categorically stated that on 20.8.1996 she had gone to the field of her uncle for fetching the grass. After having kept the grass in a "Kilta", when she was about to return home, the accused came from behind and after having thrown the "Kilta” away, he made her lie on the ground and thereafter committed forecible sexual intercourse with her. She had resisted and tried to make herself free from the clutches of the accused and in this process had sustained injuries on her back and arms. 16. The learned Counsel for the accused has pointed out the certain circumstances to show that the evidence of the prosecutrix is not trustworthy and sufficient for the conviction of the accused. Alternatively, it has been contended that in case a sexual intercourse is found to have taken place, the same was with the consent of the prosecutrix. The circumstances pointed out by the learned Counsel are:— (i) No attempt was made by the prosecutrix to run away, nor she ever tried to hit or bite the accused in the course of resistance; (ii) No injury either on the person of the prosecutrix or on the person of the accused; (iii) Place of occurrence is an open place; and (iv) The prosecutrix is habitual to sexual intercourse. 17. As stated above, PW 6 Dr. Anita Sarkar, on the basis of observations made by her during the course of medical examination, has given a definite opinion that the prosecutrix has been subjected to sexual intercourse in the recent past. Tenderness at the site of hymen tear was noticed. There was also redness of the vaginal wall. In addition to the said injuries, PW. 6 Dr. Anita Sarkar also noticed the following injuries in the form of bruises on the person of the prosecutrix:— (a) around both breasts; (b) on the right side of lower abdomen; and (c) on the back upper half. Therefore, in the present case, it cannot be said that there has been no injuries on the person of the prosecutrix. 6 Dr. Anita Sarkar also noticed the following injuries in the form of bruises on the person of the prosecutrix:— (a) around both breasts; (b) on the right side of lower abdomen; and (c) on the back upper half. Therefore, in the present case, it cannot be said that there has been no injuries on the person of the prosecutrix. Though the prosecutrix as PW 3 has admitted that she did not bite, slap or pinch the accused while offering resistance, she has gone to explain that she could not do so since the accused was holding her hands. 18. In Balwant Singh and others v. State of Punjab, (1987) 2 S.C.C. 27, the prosecutrix had an injury on her back. There was only red abrasions on her breasts. It was held that it cannot be said that whenever resistance is offered, there must be some injuries on the body of the victim or that absence of injuries would rule out resistance. 19. The presence of injuries around the breasts, on the right side of lower abdomen and on the upper half of the back of the prosecutrix coupled with the tenderness at the site of hymen tear and redness of the vaginal wall shows that force was used against the prosecutrix while she was being subjected to sexual intercourse. 20. In State of Rajasthan v. Shri Narayan, (1992) 3 Supreme Court Cases 615), the prosecutrix, a married woman, had abrasions on the vaginal wall and the consequential inflammation of the labia majora as well as minora and the clitoria. It was held that such injuries provide corroborative evidence that someone had forcible sex with her. It was also observed that it was not possible to believe that when a married woman has sex with her husband in the privacy of their badroom, she would suffer abrasions on her body and the vaginal walls. 21. In the present case, there is no suggestion by the accused that the prosecutrix had sex with him or anyone else with her own free will or consent. Even otherwise, the presence of injuries on the person of the prosecutrix rules not consent. Though the prosecutrix was found to be habitual to sexual intercourse, PW 6 Dr. 21. In the present case, there is no suggestion by the accused that the prosecutrix had sex with him or anyone else with her own free will or consent. Even otherwise, the presence of injuries on the person of the prosecutrix rules not consent. Though the prosecutrix was found to be habitual to sexual intercourse, PW 6 Dr. Anita Sarkar has, in reply to the Court question, specifically stated:— "May be that the victim was habitual to sexual intercourse but when the recent intercourse was done forcibly, that might have caused the redness to the vaginal wall and 22. There is no denying that no injuries were noticed on the person of the accused when he was subjected to medical examination on 22.8.1996 at about 11.30 a.m., that is about more than 42 hours after the occurrence. The learned Counsel for the accused has thus contended that absence of injuries on the person of the accused especially on his private parts rules out the possibility of the rape. 23. In Parkash Chand v. State of H.P., (1995 (1) S.L.J. 524), a learned Single Judge of this Court has held that there is no legal principle of universal application laying down that absence of injuries on the male organ of the accused would be fatal to the prosecution case and rule out the commission of rape on the prosecutrix. Every case has to be approached on its own facts and circumstances in which the offence was committed. It may not be out of place to quote here paragraph-9 at page-380 of Modis Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology (Twenty-first Edition). It reads:— "Injuries to the genital parts may result from force exercised by the accused or from forces applied by the victim. In addition to scratches or lacerations on the penis caused by the finger nails of the victim during a struggle, an abrasion or laceration may be discovered on the prepuce or glans penis, but more often on the fraenum, due to forcible introduction of the organ into the narrow vagina of a virgin, especially of a child, but it is not necessary that there should always be marks of injuries on the penis in such cases." (Underlining supplied). 24. 24. The question as to the effect of absence of injuries on the penis of the accused also came up for consideration before the Hon’ble Apex Court in State of Himachal Pradesh v. Rghubir Singh, (1993 (2) S.L.J. 1418). In the said case, the prosecutrix was of about 7/8 years of age while the accused was of about 16 years of age. No injuries were found on the penis of the accused. Only one injury was found on the private part of the prosecutrix. The accused, though was convicted and sentenced by the trial Court, was, however, acquitted by a learned Single Judge of this Court. The Apex Court, while setting aside the acquittal and restoring the conviction and sentence imposed upon the accused by the trial Court, while dealing with the absence of injuries on the penis of the accused, has held:— "Dr. Ghatate, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent submitted, by reference to Rahim Beg and another v. State of U.P., (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 Beg’s case (supra) was based on its peculiar facts and the observations made therein were in a totally different context and cannot advance the case of the respondent. The observations in Rahim Beefs case (supra) cannot be mechanically pressed into aid in every case regardless of the specific circumstances of the crime and absence of the fact situation as existing in that case. Every case has to be approached with realistic diversity based on peculiar facts and circumstances of that case......" 25. Coming to the facts of the present case. It is established that the prosecutrix at the relevant time was major and was above the age of eighteen years. It is in the evidence of PW 6 Dr. Every case has to be approached with realistic diversity based on peculiar facts and circumstances of that case......" 25. Coming to the facts of the present case. It is established that the prosecutrix at the relevant time was major and was above the age of eighteen years. It is in the evidence of PW 6 Dr. Anita Sarkar that the prosecutrix was habitual to sexual intercourse. Therefore, the absence of injuries on the person of the accused loses its significance and would not rule out the possibility of rape. Injuries were found on the private part of the prosecutrix in the form of i tenderness at the site of hymen tear and redness of the vaginal wall. PW 6 Dr. Anita Sarkar has categorically stated that such injuries might have been caused when the recent intercourse was done forcibly. 26. Similarly, no benefit can be drawn by the accused due to absence of smegma on the corona glands and glans at the time of his medical examination which was carried out by PW 7 Dr. Rajesh Sarkar on 22.8.1996 after about 42 hours of the occurrence. 27. The Honble Supreme Court in Dr. S.P. Kohli v. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana, (1978 Cr. L.J. 1804), has held that it is well known in the medical world that the examination of smegma F loses all importance after 24 hours of the performance of the sexual intercourse. 28. The learned Counsel for the accused has next contended I that the rape is alleged to have been committed in a field just adjoining a path and that it is highly improbable that the accused would have chosen such an open place at that hour of the day for committing the rape. 29. There is no merit in the contention of the learned Counsel. Firstly, there is nothing on the record to show that the place of occurrence adjoins the path leading to the village. The prosecutrix Kumari Savitri as PW 3 has specifically denied the suggestion put to her that the place of occurrence adjoined a path. Similarly Smt. V Padmu Devi, the mother of the prosecutrix, while appearing as PW 4 has denied the suggestion that the place of occurrence adjoined a path. PW 5 Ram Bahadur an uncle of the prosecutrix has stated that a path exists at a distance of 20/25 metres from the place of occurrence. Similarly Smt. V Padmu Devi, the mother of the prosecutrix, while appearing as PW 4 has denied the suggestion that the place of occurrence adjoined a path. PW 5 Ram Bahadur an uncle of the prosecutrix has stated that a path exists at a distance of 20/25 metres from the place of occurrence. Secondly, it is significant to note that the sexual intercourse was not as a result of consent. Ordinarily, the parties to a sexual act by consent only would look out for a safe, quiet and secluded place. There is nothing surprising in the conduct of a lust-ridden in behaving in a care-free manner, trying to make most of the situation of the prosecutrix being alone and helpless. There is nothing inconceivable about the accused having committed forcible sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix in the field, an open place at that hour of the day. The prosecutrix was all alone gathering the grass. The accused suddenly came from behind, threw her "Kilta" and pounced upon her after throwing her on the ground. It appears that the accused was lust-ridden and finding the prosecutrix all alone in the field lost control over himself and took her by force. 30. A similar contention was raised on behalf of the accused and repelled by the Apex Court in State of Rajasthan v. Shri Narayan, (1992) 3 SCC 615. 31. The defence raised by the accused as to false implication is self contradictory. On the one hand, he had taken the plea that his parents and that of the prosecutrix had decided during his and prosecutrix childhood that on becoming of age they would be married to each other and that since he had refused to marry the prosecutrix, he has been falsely implicated in the case. On the other hand, the accused has taken the stand that since he and his father had worked and canvassed for Akbar Singh, a rival candidate to PW 5 Ram Bahadur, uncle of the prosecutrix, during the Panchayat elections, he has been falsely implicated. 32. Though PW 5 Ram Bahadur has admitted that the accused and his father during the course of Panchayat elections had worked and canvassed for his rival candidate Akbar Singh, the same cannot be taken as a ground for false implication of the accrued. 32. Though PW 5 Ram Bahadur has admitted that the accused and his father during the course of Panchayat elections had worked and canvassed for his rival candidate Akbar Singh, the same cannot be taken as a ground for false implication of the accrued. It cannot be believed that the parents of an unmarried girl would put her chastity and future prospects of marriage at stake just to falsely implicate in a crime of rape for the reason of the accused and his father having worked and canvassed for a rival candidate during Panchayat elections. 33. Insofar as the other ground for false implication is concerned, suggestion to this effect was given only to the prosecutrix during her cross-examination. No such suggestion was given either to PW 4, the mother of the prosecutrix, or to PW 5, the uncle of the prosecutrix. Nor such a ground had been put forth by the accused in his statement under Section 313, Code of Criminal Procedure. 34. In State of Rajasthan v. Shri Narayan (supra) the Honble Supreme Court has held that unless the evidence discloses that the prosecutrix and her relations (husband in the said case) had strong reasons to falsely implicate the accused, ordinarily the Court should have no hesitation in accepting the version of the prosecutrix regarding the incident. 35. The statement of the prosecutrix as PW 3 is clear, cogent and specific and she has given a comprehensive account of the occurrence. Her narration of the incident clearly points out that it was the accused who had committed rape on her. Her statement also stands corroborated by the medical evidence coming on the record and as such sufficient to connect the accused with the crime. The accused, therefore, stands rightly convicted by the learned Sessions Judge for the offence under Section 376, Indian Penal Code. 36. Insofar as the question of quantum of sentence is concerned, it has been contended by the learned Counsel for the accused that the accused is a young boy of about 20/21 years of age and has been undergoing sentence since 9.11.1998 consequent upon his conviction. Besides, he has remained in police/judicial custody during the course of investigation for the period 21.8.1996 to 13.9.1996, therefore, in the interest of justice, the sentence be reduced to the period already undergone. Besides, he has remained in police/judicial custody during the course of investigation for the period 21.8.1996 to 13.9.1996, therefore, in the interest of justice, the sentence be reduced to the period already undergone. The learned Assistant Advocate-General, on the other hand, has contended that the accused has already been dealt with leniently by the learned trial Court inasmuch as instead of the minimum sentence of seven years prescribed under the law, he has been sentenced to imprisonment only for a period of five years and that there are no extenuating circumstances in this case for reduction in the quantum of sentence. 37. The accused stands dealt with leniently by the learned Sessions Judge. Therefore, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, no further leniency is called for. Resultantly, the present appeal is dismissed. The conviction and sentence imposed by the learned Sessions Judge are affirmed and maintained. Appeal dismissed.