JUDGMENT M.R. Verma, J.—This appeal has been preferred by the appellant-accused (hereinafter referred to as the accused) against the judgment dated 25.8.1999 whereby the accused has been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Hamirpur under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a term of 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to a further term of rigorous imprisonment of one year under Section 376, IPC. However, no sentence has been imposed under Section 506 IPC in view of the provisions of Section 71 IPC. 2. Case of the prosecution against the accused, in brief, is that on 12.10.1998 when Parwati Devi, the prosecutrix (PW-5) at about 8.30 p.m. was returning home from the fields, the accused pounced upon her, closed her mouth with his hand and pushed her down and thereafter gagged her mouth with dupatta. Her wearing apparels were torn and thrown away by the accused and he committed rape on her. In the process, the prosecutrix sustained injuries on her arms, legs, besides tooth bite injury on her face. The accused threatened her that in the event of her raising alarm or complaining to anyone about the occurrence, she would be cut to pieces and her entire family would be burnt. When the prosecutrix got opportunity to take out dupatta from her mouth, she took it out and raised shouts. On hearing her cires, a few village women including Salima Devi (PW-3) and Kalan Devi (PW-6) came on the spot and the accused bolted away. The prosecutrix, in naked condition, reached her house and narrated the occurrence to her mother-in-law Barfi Devi (PW-8), and put on the clothes given to her by her mother-in-law. The husband of the prosecutrix was employed elsewhere and was not at home. The prosecutrix, therefore, contacted her brother telephonically and requested him to help her in reporting the matter to the police. On 13.10.1998, the prosecutrix made a written complaint Ex. PD to the officer in-charge, police station, Bhoranj on the basis of which FIR Ex. PS was recorded. The prosecutrix was then taken to the Community Health Centre, Bhoranj for medical examination but for want of a lady doctor there, she was taken to District Hospital, Hamirpur where she was medically examined by Dr. PD to the officer in-charge, police station, Bhoranj on the basis of which FIR Ex. PS was recorded. The prosecutrix was then taken to the Community Health Centre, Bhoranj for medical examination but for want of a lady doctor there, she was taken to District Hospital, Hamirpur where she was medically examined by Dr. Sunita Galodha (PW-1) on 14.10.1998 at 11 a.m. As per the MLC Ex.PC issued by the said doctor, the following injuries were found on the person of the prosecutrix : GENERAL INJURIES 1. There were multiple small abrasions distributed in oval manner alongwith petichial haemorrhages over left cheek appearing to be bite marks. 2. There were multiple irregular scratch marks just behind right ear. 3. There were multiple grazed abrasions scattered over mediolateral aspect of 1/3 of right forearm. 4. There were multiple scattered abrasions over upper l/3rd of right thigh and buttocks. 5. There were pinkish bluish oval 3.0 x 2.0 cm bruise over right knee alongwith small irregular multiple grazed abrasions above that. 6. Similarly there was about 3.0 x 2.0 cm oval pinkish bluish eccymosis with multiple grazed abrasions over inner side of it. As per the medical opinion, the probable duration of the injuries was within 48 hours. At the time of medical examination, the pubic hair of the prosecutrix were cut, packed and sealed. The swab one from vagina and another from cervix were taken. Two vaginal smears were prepared and the wearing apparels of the prosecutrix, namely, Salwar and Kameej which were found torn were also made into a sealed packet. The aforesaid articles were handed over to the police for Chemical analysis and the medical opinion was reserved till the receipt of the report from the Chemical Examiner. On chemical analysis of the aforesaid material, the report Ex. PB was issued by the State Forensic Science Laboratory. Semen, however, was not detected on any of the aforesaid articles.After perusal of the report Ex. PB, PW-1 gave the opinion that in view of the injuries observed on the person of the prosecutrix, the possibility of sexual offence could not be ruled out. During investigation, the police took the broken bangle pieces in possession from the spot vide memo Ex. PE. 3. On 13.10.1998, the accused also presented applications Ex. PW-14/A and Ex. PW-14/C, respectively addressed to the Deputy Commissioner, Hamirpur and Superintendent of Police, Hamirpur. During investigation, the police took the broken bangle pieces in possession from the spot vide memo Ex. PE. 3. On 13.10.1998, the accused also presented applications Ex. PW-14/A and Ex. PW-14/C, respectively addressed to the Deputy Commissioner, Hamirpur and Superintendent of Police, Hamirpur. These were received by the concerned SHO on being marked to him by the concerned authorities. As per these applications, the accused alleged that he was asked by the prosecutrix to have sexual inter-course with her and on refusal of the accused, she raised hue and cry that the accused had removed her clothes and committed rape on her whereas the accused is incapable of having sexual inter-course. It has further been alleged therein that the prosecutrix had called 7 or 8 persons to beat the accused. The investigating officer, on receipt of these applications, took in possession an Exercise Book containing writings of the accused on production by the accused vide memo Ex. PG. Specimen writings and signatures (Ex. PM/1 to Ex. PM/12) were also taken by the investigating officer in the presence of an Executive Magistrate (PW-13). The said applications, admitted writings and specimen writings/signatures were sent to the Government Examiner of Questioned Documents who opined that the questioned writings, admitted writing and specimen writings were written by one and the same person. His detailed reasons for such opinion are contained in Ex. PW-14/R. On arrest of the accused, he was also got medically examined. On such examination, PW-9 Dr. Naresh Sharma issued the MLC Ex. PJ opining thereby that there was nothing to suggest that the accused was not capable of performing sexual act and indicating the following injuries found on the person of the accused at the time of his medical examination: 1. There was an abrasion of 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm on right side of chest over midline of clavicle. Clotted blood was present. 2. There was an abrasion measuring 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm right side back 4 cm lateral to D5. Clotted blood was present. 3. There were multiple abrasions over dorsal aspect of left forearm. These were running medio laterally and clotted blood was present. 4. There were multiple abrasions over right olecranon process and clotted blood was present. 5. There was an abrasion 0.5 x 0.5 cm over right side back 3 cm lat. lying opposite 2 sacral vetebral spine and clotted blood was present. These were running medio laterally and clotted blood was present. 4. There were multiple abrasions over right olecranon process and clotted blood was present. 5. There was an abrasion 0.5 x 0.5 cm over right side back 3 cm lat. lying opposite 2 sacral vetebral spine and clotted blood was present. As per the medical opinion, the duration of these injuries was within 12 to 24 hours having been caused by a blunt weapon: 4. During investigation, on production by the accused, the police took in possession a pant vide memo Ex. PF. 5. On being satisfied of the commission of the offences punishable under Sections 376 afid,r506 IPC by the accused, the officer incharge, Police Station, Bhoranj forwarded a charge sheet against him to the concerned Court. 6. The accused was tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Hamirpur on a charge under Sections 376 and 506 IPC. 7. To prove the charge against the accused, prosecution examined as many as 19 witnesses. 8. The accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. wherein he has denied the prosecution case as a whole and claimed that he has been falsely implicated in the case and is innocent. The accused led no defence evidence. Finally the accused was convicted and sentenced as aforesaid. Hence this appeal. 9. I have heard the learned Counsel provided to the accused at State expense and the learned Additional Advocate General for the State and have also gone through the records. 10. The leraned Counsel for the accused has assailed the conviction on the following grounds: (i) That the place of occurrence is close to the inhabited houses around, therefore, it was not possible to commit rape at such a place; (ii) That the statement of the prosecutrix is unreliable in view of her conduct and improvement made therein about the act allegedly committed; (iii) There is no corroboration of the statement of the prosecutrix by any reliable evidence. On the contrary, absence of spermatozoa on clothes, vaginal smear slides, swabs and pubic hair of the prosecutrix rules out the alleged commission of rape; and (iv) In any case, it is case of consent by the prosecutrix to the sexual act. 11. On the contrary, absence of spermatozoa on clothes, vaginal smear slides, swabs and pubic hair of the prosecutrix rules out the alleged commission of rape; and (iv) In any case, it is case of consent by the prosecutrix to the sexual act. 11. While urging the first ground supra, the learned Counsel contended that in view of the close location of inhabited houses and the place being close to the path, it is improbable that accused would have committed forcible act of sex as alleged. 12. The site plan Ex. PT depicts the place of commission of rape as B. This place is shown between the stones and a Tiala, thus not quite open. There are admittedly a few houses around but as stated by the prosecutrix, the houses of Kalan Devi and Salma are about 10 to 15 meters away and other houses are at considerable distance. Be it stated that the time of the commission of the offence is 8.30 p.m. in the month of October. Thus, night had fallen at the relevant time and there could be no apprehension in such a situation of the commission of the offence being noticed by the inhabitants of the nearby houses. Therefore, the contention does not hold good. 13. While pressing the second ground supra, the learned Counsel has contended that the prosecutrix while lodging the FIR has not stated specifically that she was raped by the accused but her version in the FIR is that the accused did "Galat Kam" with her and this expression is too vague and capable of denoting acts of various type. It was further contended that the prosecutrix for the first time spoke of commission of rape at the time of making a statement in the Court, and thereby has improved her earlier statement rendering her version unreliable. To support the contention, the learned Counsel has relied on Sitaram v. State of Maharashtra, (1974 Cri. L.J. 82) and State of Karnataka v. Sureshbabu Puk Raj Porral, (AIR 1994 SC 966). 14. The prosecutrix admittedly reported the matter to the police vide written complaint Ex. PD on the basis of which FIR Ex. PS was recorded. The prosecutrix therein has referred to the act committed by the accused as "Galat Kam" and has not specifically mentioned that accused committed rape/forcible sexual inter-course with her without her consent or against her will. 14. The prosecutrix admittedly reported the matter to the police vide written complaint Ex. PD on the basis of which FIR Ex. PS was recorded. The prosecutrix therein has referred to the act committed by the accused as "Galat Kam" and has not specifically mentioned that accused committed rape/forcible sexual inter-course with her without her consent or against her will. Therefore, the question arises as to whether the expression "Galat Kam" as used in Ex. PD meant "rape" or something else. 15. Bombay High Court in Sitarams case supra while dealing with a case of rape wherein the act imputed to the accused was referred to as "Beadabi" held as follows : "What this witness states is that the disclosure by Saraswati was of the accused committing "Beadabi". 19. The expression is, no doubt, very vague, obviously it can denote acts of various types. It is hardly possible by an inferential process to equate such an averment with a disclosure about the commission of rape. The material requisite for the basing of a finding has got to be clear and specific; and in case of an inferential process the material must be such as to warrant the one inference and none other. It is hardly possible to agree that the above said disclosure satisfies these tests. 20. The position thus is that the testimony of the prosecutrix cannot be acted upon without corroboration. It would be entirely unsafe to base a finding of guilt on the same without corroboration. The corroboration attempted on the record does not stand the requisite test, with the result that there is no corroboration.” 16. In case State of Karnataka v. Sureshbabu Puk Raj Porrel, the Honble Supreme Court held as follows : "7. Now coming to the evidence of PW-7 she deposed that she went along with the sister of the accused to the Bus Stand and got into the bus and went to several places and stayed with the accused in lodges and that the accused had inter-course with her. She, however, added that the accused was having intercourse against her will. She was cross-examined at length and we find several omissions in her previous statement. In the cross-examination the defence tried to elicit from her as to what exactly the accused did to her in those places during night. She, however, added that the accused was having intercourse against her will. She was cross-examined at length and we find several omissions in her previous statement. In the cross-examination the defence tried to elicit from her as to what exactly the accused did to her in those places during night. She went on saying that the accused did something to her which he ought not to have done. She admitted that her statement was the same before the police also. The learned Single Judge of the High Court especially pointed out this aspect and observed that it is very difficult to infer that the accused had inter-course with her. Therefore, in the absence of some other evidence to support the prosecution case that the accused had inter-course with her, in our view, the High Court was not wrong in holding that the offence under Section 376, IPC is not made out....." 17. In the instant case the expression "Galat Kam" has to be read and understood with reference to the context for the reason that in the State of H.P., an act of unlawful sex is referred to as "Boora Kam" or "Galat Kam" in common parlance. The material part of the narration in Ex. PD reads, "...GHAR KO AATE SAMAI JAMAN KE PAAS JO PED KAT DIYA HAIUSKE PAAS DEVINDER KUMAR SPUTAR KARTAR SINGH RAJPUT NE LAGBHAG 8.30 SHAM KE KAREEB MERE OOPER JHAPAT KAR HAATH SE MERA MOONH BAND KAR DIYA AUR MUJHE FAINK DIYA AUR PHIR MERA MOONH DUPATTE SE BAND KAR DIYA AUR MERE SARE KAPRE PHAR KAR DOOR FAINK DIYA AUR USNE MERE SATH GALAT KAM KIYA, JAB MAINE JABARDASTI SE MOONH SE DUPATTA CHHUDWAYA AUR MAIN CHILLAI, GAUN KI AURATAIN IKATHI HUI, TO WEH BHAG GAYA AUR MAIN NAGAN AWASTHA MAIN GHAR A A GAI..." The averments thus are that while the prosecutrix was coming home, near the Jamun tree which had been felled, Devinder Kumar pounced upon her at about 8.30 p.m., gagged her mouth, threw her down, gagged her mouth with Dupatta and tore and threw away all her clothes and he committed Galat Kam with her. Against the given background the expression "Galat Kam" referred to in Ex. PD can mean only forcible sexual inter-course and nothing else. Against the given background the expression "Galat Kam" referred to in Ex. PD can mean only forcible sexual inter-course and nothing else. It is for this reason that understanding the correct connotation of the expression, "Galat Kam" in common parlance, the police on receipt of complaint Ex. PD immediately registered a case under Section 376 IPC. Even for the accused, no cross-examination was directed to elicit any other meaning to the expression "Galat Kam". On the contrary, the defence suggested to the material prosecution witnesses is that the prosecutrix was having illicit physical relations with the accused and at the relevant time, they were surprised while in compromising terms, hence the prosecutrix made out a charge of rape against the accused to save her honour. Thus, by putting the above suggestion, the defence itself has made it clear that "Galat Kam" an referred to in Ex. PD means the act of sex by the accused, and nothing else. Therefore, the prosecutrix cannot be said to have made improvements in her earlier statement Ex. PD when she states on oath that the accused committed rape on her. There is corroborative evidence on record as I shall be discussing hereafter at the appropriate place, from which the only possible inference which can be drawn is that the expression "Galat Kam" as used in Ex. PD means act of illicit sex and nothing else. 18. To challenge the veracity of the statement of the prosecutrix the learned Counsel has further contended that the conduct of the prosecutrix in not disclosing the alleged occurrence to the ladies who came on the spot on hearing her cries belies the version of rape. The prosecutrix has duly explained, her conduct in going to her house from the place of occurrence instead of staying there to narrate the occurrence to the ladies who arrived there on hearing her cries. She has stated that on seeing Kalan Devi (PW-6) coming towards her, she proceeded towards her house as she was almost naked at that time. The explanation offered justifies the conduct of the prosecutrix in going to her house instead of waiting for Kalan Devi to reach on the spot and narrate the occurrence to her in naked condition. 19. In view of the above, it cannot be held that the statement of the prosecutrix is unreliable due to the alleged improvement or conduct. The explanation offered justifies the conduct of the prosecutrix in going to her house instead of waiting for Kalan Devi to reach on the spot and narrate the occurrence to her in naked condition. 19. In view of the above, it cannot be held that the statement of the prosecutrix is unreliable due to the alleged improvement or conduct. Be it stated that the prosecutrix is a married woman and, therefore, is not expected to come forward with a humiliating version of her own which may adversely affect her honour and married life. No motive has been imputed to the prosecutrix by the defence to falsely implicate the accused for the commission of rape except that it was a case of sex with consent but being surprised by the approaching women while in compromising terms, the accused fled away and the prosecutrix, to save her honour concocted a false charge of rape against the accused. The material on record, however, falsify this defence of the accused. 20. It was further contended by the learned Counsel for the accused that there is no corroboration of the statement of the prosecutrix by any other evidence. On the contrary, absence of spermatozea on her clothes, vagina, swab etc. goes to show that she was not sexually assaulted. 21. A victim of rape is not an accomplice whose statement cannot be acted upon unless corroborated in material particulars by other independent and reliable evidence. Seeking corroboration of the statement of a victim of rape is not a rule of law but of prudence. A perusal of the statement of the prosecutrix (PW-2) reveals that her statement is natural, cogent and devoid of any improbability. She has fully supported on oath the version regarding commission of rape on her by the accused. Further more, her statement is corroborated by other evidence on record. 22. The medical opinion given by Dr. Sunita Galodha (PW-1) vide MLC Ex. PC and in her statement is that in view of the injuries observed on the person of the prosecutrix, the possibility of sexual offence cannot be ruled out. The injuries noticed on the person of the prosecutrix at the time of her medical examination have already been pointed out in para 2 of this judgment. One of the injuries so found is opined to be bite marks over left cheek. The injuries noticed on the person of the prosecutrix at the time of her medical examination have already been pointed out in para 2 of this judgment. One of the injuries so found is opined to be bite marks over left cheek. As per the opinion given by PW-1 the injuries found on the person of the prosecutrix are capable of being caused during assailants endeavour to overcome victims struggle and resistence against sexual assault. Thus, the medical opinion lends corroboration to the statement of the prosecutrix that she was subjected to forcible sexual inter-course and rules out it to be a case of sex with consent. 23. According to the prosecutrix, the accused had forcibly torn and removed the Salwar and shirt of the prosecutrix to commit rape. The Salwar Ex. P-l and shirt Ex. P-2 in torn condition were taken in possession by PW-1 at the time of medical examination of the prosecutrix and had been identified by the prosecutrix as her clothes torn away by the accused at the time of commission of the offence. This also corroborates the version of rape and rules out any consent by the prosecutrix to the accused to have sex with her. 24. Vide memo Ex. PE broken bangle pieces from the place of occurrence, have been taken in possession by the police. This recovery is fully supported by PW-4 Rajinder Singh and PW-17 Achhar Paul Singh, investigating officer and the prosecutrix (PW-2) has identified these bangles pieces Ex. P-3 as those of her bangles broken on the spot at the time of occurrence. She has not been cross-examined in this regard nor it was suggested to any material witness that it was a fake recovery. The recovery of the bangle pieces Ex. P-3 from the place of occurrence thus corroborates the version that accused had forcible sexual inter-course with the prosecutrix and rules out the defence that it was a case of sex with consent. 25. The accused was also got medically examined. The MLC in this regard is Ex. PJ issued by Dr. Naresh Sharma, (PW-9) who medically examined the accused on 13.10.1998. The injuries found on the person of the accused have already been set out in para 3 of this judgment. As per opinion given by PW-9, these injuries are possible during victims struggle or resistence against sexual assault, and could be caused by nails. PJ issued by Dr. Naresh Sharma, (PW-9) who medically examined the accused on 13.10.1998. The injuries found on the person of the accused have already been set out in para 3 of this judgment. As per opinion given by PW-9, these injuries are possible during victims struggle or resistence against sexual assault, and could be caused by nails. This medical opinion also lends credibility to the statement of the prosecutrix and rules out the defence that she was a consenting party to the sexual act of the accused. 26. According to the prosecutrix, immediately after the occurrence, she narrated the incident of the rape on her by the accused to her mother-in-law Barfi Devi (PW-7) and other ladies who had come to her house. This version of the prosecutrix is corroborated by Barfi Devi (PW-7), Salima Devi (PW-3) and Kalan Devi (PW-6). There is no compelling reason to disbelieve the statements of those witnesses which corroborate the prosecution version. 27. The accused is stated to have made applications Exs. PW-14/ A and PW-14/C respectively to the Deputy Commissioner and Superintendent of Police, Hamirpur averring therein that around the relevant time he was asked by the prosecutrix to have sexual inter-course with her and on his refusal to oblige, she raised hue and cry and accused him of using force against her in an attempt to commit rape and that she was so much excited that she herself threw away her clothes. It is further averred therein that the accused is incapable of committing an act of sex. The accused though has denied making of these applications but in view of the opinion given by the Handwriting Expert (PW-14) these applications are proved to be in the handwriting of the accused and PW-19 Dy. S.P. Madhu Sudan has stated that application Ex. PW-14/C addressed to Superintendent of Police was presented to him by the accused. Thus, it is established that the accused is the author of applications Exs. PW-14/A and PW-14/C. As per the medical opinion vide MLC Ex. PJ and as stated by PW-9, the accused is not incapable of committing sexual inter-course as claimed vide Exs. PW-14/A and PW-14/C, therefore, he vainly tried to create a smoke screen to conceal his involvement in the commission of the offence of rape. 28. PW-14/A and PW-14/C. As per the medical opinion vide MLC Ex. PJ and as stated by PW-9, the accused is not incapable of committing sexual inter-course as claimed vide Exs. PW-14/A and PW-14/C, therefore, he vainly tried to create a smoke screen to conceal his involvement in the commission of the offence of rape. 28. It is though evident from the report received from the State Forensic Science Laboratory that spermatozea was not found in the clothes, vaginal swab etc. of the prosecutrix, but this does not necessarily mean that the prosecutrix was not subjected to sexual intercourse. As already seen, there is no reason to disbelieve the statement of the prosecutrix that she was raped by the accused and more so when such statement is corroborated by other evidence on the record. In view of this evidence, absence of sperms in the clothes swab etc. does not disprove the prosecution version. Honble Supreme Court has recently held in case State of H.P. v. Lekh Raj and another, (2000 Cri L.J. 44) that the presence of spermatozoa dead or alive would differ from person to person and its positive presence depend upon various circumstances. Otherwise also, the presence or absence of spermatozoa is ascertained for the purpose of corroboration of the statement of the prosecutrix. If the prosecutrix is believed to be truthful witness, in her deposition, no further corroboration may be insisted. Since the statement of the prosecutrix in this case has been found reliable and believable and is corroborated by other evidence, therefore, absence of spermatozea in the swab etc. is inconsequential. 29. In view of the above discussion and findings, the contention that the prosecutrix was a consenting party to the act of sex merits rejection It is more so because there is virtually unchallenged version that Kalan Devi (PVV-6) and other ladies came to the spot on hearing the cries of the prosecutrix. Had it been a case of consent, there was no occasion for the prosecutrix to raise hue and cry for help. 30. The above discussion leads me to the conclusion that the learned Sessions Judge has rightly convicted and sentenced the accused and the same do not call for any interference. 31. As a result, the appeal merits dismissal and is accordingly dismissed. 30. The above discussion leads me to the conclusion that the learned Sessions Judge has rightly convicted and sentenced the accused and the same do not call for any interference. 31. As a result, the appeal merits dismissal and is accordingly dismissed. A copy of this judgment be sent to the accused who is in jail undergoing the sentence of imprisonment, for information through the Superintendent of the concerned jail. Appeal dismissed. -