JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal is directed against the Judgment dated 16.12.1994, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Jalore convicting the appellant of offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months rigorous imprisonment. He has also been convicted for offence under Section 376 IPC and sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo 3 months rigorous imprisonment. The appellant has further been convicted under Section 363 IPC and sentenced to 4 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo one months rigorous imprisonment. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 13.10.1993, P.W. 1 Rana Ram lodged an FIR at P.S. Jalore stating inter alia that on 12.10.1993 at about 7.00 PM, accused appellant Shravan Kumar visited to his house and enticed his daughter Baby Ugam, aged 7 years to go with him. Baby Ugam did not return till late night and, as such, a search was made. Neither Shravan Kumar nor baby Ugam were available at the house. The search yield nothing positive. Next Day, he came to know from P.W.-6 Pukhraj @ Pakia that on the last evening, Shravan Kumar visited his cabin and purchased some toffees for baby Ugam. P.W. 5 Chotha Ram also informed that in the evening at about 7.00 or 7.30 PM, he had seen Shravan Kumar with baby Ugam on bicycle, proceeding towards village Aavloge. On receiving this information, P.W. 2 Sangari, wife of Rama Ram and her daughter-in-law P.W. 4 Kamla proceeded towards village Aavloge near the math of Majadevji beneath a bambool tree. They found the dead body of baby Ugam in a shrub. There was bleeding from the mouth, nose, ears and private parts of the dead body. There was presence of foot-prints. The underwear of baby Ugam was found on bambool tree. On this information, police registered a case under Secs. 363, 376, and 302 IPC. After usual investigation, police filed challan against the appellant Shravan Kumar for offences under Secs. 302, 376 and 363 IPC. 3. The accused appellant denied the charges levelled against him and claimed trial. The underwear of baby Ugam was found on bambool tree. On this information, police registered a case under Secs. 363, 376, and 302 IPC. After usual investigation, police filed challan against the appellant Shravan Kumar for offences under Secs. 302, 376 and 363 IPC. 3. The accused appellant denied the charges levelled against him and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case examined 13 witnesses and produced certain documents. The appellant in the statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. denied the correctness of prosecution evidence appearing against him. The learned Trial Court found the prosecution case proved relying on the piece of circumstances as formulated in para No. 39 of the Judgment. Accordingly, the learned trial Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as noticed above. 4. It is contended by Mr. T.S. Champawat, learned counsel for the appellant that Trial Court has committed error on the circumstances as formulated in para No. 39 which can neither be described as clear and cogent nor the circumstances are of nature which exclude every other hypothesis of the guilt of charge of rape and murder of baby Ugam. It is also submitted that there is no credible evidence in support of each of the circumstances put forth by the prosecution. Learned Public Prosecutor has supported the Judgment of learned Trial Court. 5. We have scanned, scrutinised and evaluated the prosecution evidence carefully and considered the rival contentions. 6. P.W. 12 Dr. Kishan Singh Rathore has stated that he conducted the post mortem of baby Ugam and found the following injuries on her person. 1- cgqr lkjh [kjkspsa o fuyxq yky jax fy;s gq;s mldh xnZu ds lkeus o xnZu ds nksuksa rjQ vk;s gq, FksA 2- mxe dh ;ksuh iwjh rjg ls QVh gqbZ Fkh] ;g Qvko ey }kj rd Fkk fyfc;k estksjk o fych;k ekbZuksjk ij lwtu Fkh o yykbZ FkhA mldk gkbZeu iwjh rjg ls QVk gqvk FkkA mlds ihB ij cgqr lkjs [kjksap ds fu'kku FksA ;s lHkh pksVsa e`R;q iwoZ vkbZ gqbZ FkhA nksuksa QsQM+s datLVM Fks] tks >kx o [kwu ls Hkjs gq, FksA czsu rFkk esEcjsal datLVsM FksA fny dk nkfguk Hkkx [kwu ls Hkjk gqvk Fkk o ck;ka Hkkx [kkyh FkkA ;d`r] frYyh o xqnsZ lHkh datLVsM FksA 7. He stated that he found blood oozing out from nostrils, mouth and both ears. All the injuries were anti mortem in nature. He stated that he found blood oozing out from nostrils, mouth and both ears. All the injuries were anti mortem in nature. In his opinion, deceased Ugam, aged 5 years, died because of asphyxia due to throttling. He also stated that injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. He further stated that vaginal findings were suggestive of rape. He further stated that post mortem was conducted by the Board of three doctors. 8. The learned Trial Court has formulated the following piece of circumstances. (i) On 12.10.1993 appellant was seen alluring baby outside the house of Rana Ram to accompany him and was seen taking her on bycycle. (ii) On the same day at about 7.00 PM, appellant was seen with baby Ugam, purchasing toffees for deceased baby Ugam from the shop of PW. 6 Pukh Raj @ Pakia and proceeding towards village Aaulodg on bycycle with her. (iii) The dead body of baby Ugam was found by P.W. 2 Sangari and P.W 4 Kamla in the morning of 13.10.1993 near math of Majadevji beneath the bambool tree in shrub. (iv) The dead body was lying in as shrub under bambool tree, blood was oozing out from mouth and nostrils. The vagina was torn extended upto ends. (v) Dr. Kishan Singh Rathore opined that rape was committed on baby Ugam. The vagina slabs were sent to the Laboratory. The human semen was detected in vagina smear. (vi) It is established from the statement of P.W. 12 Dr. Kishan Singh Rathore that baby Ugam died because of strangulation. (vii) Underwear was recovered in pursuance of information given by the accused and as per FSL report Ex. 15, human semen was detected on the underwear. (viii) The laceration was found on the penis of accused which suggests that said injury was sustained while committing rape. (ix) Conduct of accused of running away seeing the Police. (x) Name of accused finds place in FIR as per information given by P.W. 6 Pukhraj @ Pakia and PW. 5 Chotha Ram. (xi) There is no enmity of Rana Ram to falsely implicate the accused appellant. 9. As regards the evidence of last scene, P.W. 1 Rana Ram has categorically stated that accused Shravan Kumar came to his house on cycle at about 7.00 PM, he parked the cycle outside his house. After drinking water, he went out of the house. (xi) There is no enmity of Rana Ram to falsely implicate the accused appellant. 9. As regards the evidence of last scene, P.W. 1 Rana Ram has categorically stated that accused Shravan Kumar came to his house on cycle at about 7.00 PM, he parked the cycle outside his house. After drinking water, he went out of the house. Outside the house, 2-3 girls were playing. Accused asked his daughter baby Ugam, aged 7 years to accompany him, alluring that he will provide her toffees. Accused did not return with baby Ugam, therefore, after an hour, went in her search. In the village, he could not trace either baby Ugam or accused Shravan. On the next morning, P.W. 6 Pukhraj @ Pakia disclosed that accused had offered toffees to baby Ugam and took her towards village Aavloge on bicycle. He further stated that P.W. 5 Chotha Ram met him at the bus stand and told him that appellant was seen going on bicycle with baby Ugam. As such, he sent baby Ugams mother Sangari and her Bhabhi Kamla towards village Aavloge. The dead body of baby Ugam was found rear math of Mahadevji. 10. P.W. 2 Sangari has stated that appellant Shravan Kumar visited her house. He park the cycle outside the house. After drinking water, he went outside the house. There her daughter baby Ugam was playing with some other girls. Accused Shravan Kumar took her away on some pretext. When baby Ugam did not return, she went in search of her in village. In the morning, she came to know from P.W. 5 Chotha Ram that he had seen appellant Shravan Kumar taking away baby Ugam towards village Aavloge. Nothing has been licited in the cross-examination to discredit the testimony of this witness. 11. P.W. 4 Kamla has also deposed almost in the same line. Thus there is cogent and reliable evidence to the effect that on 12.10.1993, appellant Shravan Kumar visited the house of Rama Ram on the pretext of drinking water and allured water and allured baby Ugam, Who was playing outside the house, to accompany him. 12. P.W. 6 Pukhraj @ Pakia has stated that accused Shravan Kumar visited his shop and purchased toffees for baby Ugam. He left the shop with baby Ugam on the bicycle. On the next day, when he opened the shop, he heard that baby Ugam was being kidnapped. 12. P.W. 6 Pukhraj @ Pakia has stated that accused Shravan Kumar visited his shop and purchased toffees for baby Ugam. He left the shop with baby Ugam on the bicycle. On the next day, when he opened the shop, he heard that baby Ugam was being kidnapped. After sometime he came to know that dead body of baby Ugam has been found near Aavloge bus stand. The statement of this witness has been criticized by the learned counsel for the appellant on the ground that he has stated in the examination in chief that accused visited his shop on 13.10.1993; whereas incident is of 12.10.1993 dead body of baby Ugam was found in the morning of 13.10.1993 and as such, there was no question of visiting Shravan Kumar alongwith baby Ugam to his shop in the evening of 13.10.1993. It is further pointed out by learned counsel for the appellant that in the cross- examination, the witness has categorically stated that he remembered 13.10.1993 as the date he had written on the paper. We do not find any substance in this criticism. The witness might be wrongly noted 13.10.1993 in place of 12.10.1993. To be he is of such insignificant infirmity, testimony of P.W. 6 Pukhraj @ Pakia cannot be rejected. Nothing has been elicited to discredit the testimony of this witness as well. 13. P.W. 12 Dr. Kishan Singh Rathore has stated that he examined the accused Shravan Kumar on 13.10.1993 at about 6.00 PM and found laceration on the penis. Duration of the injury on the penis was of 24 hours. He also stated that nature of injury on penis was suggestive or cause on account of rape. He also opined that baby Ugam was being raped. This is an important incriminating circumstances of conclusive nature against the appellant. 14. Thus, in our opinion, the circumstances indicated above have been established by the prosecution by cogent evidence and they are of conclusive nature. The circumstances clearly prove the guilt of accused. There could be no other hypothesis but of guilt of accused appellant. 15. Consequently, we find no merit in this appeal and the same is hereby dismissed. The appellant is in jail, he will serve out the remaining part of sentence.Appeal dismissed. *******