Judgment 1. Vide order dated 1-2-1999 in case FIR No. 97 dated 18-3-1997 registered under Section 376, IPC at Police Station, Uchana (Sessions trial No. 39-A dated 29-10-1997), Ms. Kiran Anand Lall, Sessions Judge, Jind convicted Dalbir Singh son of Ram Dia under Section 376, IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs. 5000.00 or in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment of six months. 2. The prosecution case, in brief is that in the year, 1997 Ram Parvesh PW-12 was labourer working at the brick kiln of Madan Lal in village Palwa, Smt. Jashoda was also a labourer working at that brick kiln. She had her granddaughter Pinki with her, Pinkis mother was dead, Ram Parvesh and Joshoda are from Bihar. On 18-3-1997 at about 12.00 noon Ram Parvesh, Jashoda and Pinki had gone out to fetch wood near about that brick kiln. They were picking wood at some distance from the brick-kiln, while picking wood, Pinki had gone a little ahead of them, Ram Parvesh and Jashoda heard the cries of Pinki. He and Jashoda ran towards the kothri from where cries were emanating. They saw Dalbir Singh-accused raping Pinki whose under wear was lying removed. On seeing them, Dalbir ran away. They brought Pinki to the brick kiln. Owner of the brick kiln sent Ram Parvesh, Jashoda and Pinki to Uchana Hospital Doctor stitched the injuries of Pinki. They then returned to the brick kiln for taking meals. Ram Parvesh, Jashoda and Pinki then proceeded to Police Station, Uchana, ASI Kali Ram of Police Station, Uchana met them near old bus stand, Uchana, where Ram Parvesh made statement Ex. PO before him, ASI Kali Ram made endorsement Ex. PO/1 and sent that statement to Police Station, Uchana for the registration of case against the accused, on the basis of which case FIR No. 97 was registered at Police Station, Uchana vide formal FIR Ex. PF under Section 376 (Z)(f) Indian Penal Code. From Uchana Pinki was brought to general hospital, Jind, where she was medico legally examined by a medical board comprising Dr. (Mrs.) Renu Aggarwal and Dr. Manjula Bansal on 19-3-1997 at about 11.20 A.M. On general examination, they found Pinki conscious, co-operative and having pain. Her BP was 110/70 and pulse was 84 per minute, regular. There was no external injury anywhere on her body. (Mrs.) Renu Aggarwal and Dr. Manjula Bansal on 19-3-1997 at about 11.20 A.M. On general examination, they found Pinki conscious, co-operative and having pain. Her BP was 110/70 and pulse was 84 per minute, regular. There was no external injury anywhere on her body. On local examination, breasts were not developed and there was no fresh injury present. On examination of external genitalia, they found blackish contusion measuring 5 cm x 8 cm over perineum and medial side of thigh, Laceration 1.5 cm x 0.5 cm vertically was present over clitoris and urethera on right thigh. No fresh bleeding was present. As Pinki felt intense pain on insertion of finger, per vagina examination could not be done. As there was no facility for general anaesthesia, extension of wound could not be traced. One wound was perineal tear extending up to anal orifice which was already stitched by some private practitioner at Uchana and faecal matter was present over the stitches in wound. Per rectum examination could be done as patient had pain and did not allow examination. Vaginal swabs were taken from vaginal orifice. Deep vaginal swabs could not be taken. Her under wear was taken and sealed and handed over to the police. Vaginal swabs taken were sealed and handed over to the police. Pinki was referred to MCH Rohtak for exploration of wound and further management. Dr. Renu Aggarwal stated that injuries found on the private parts of Pinki could be the result of forcible penetration of male organ in her vagina, Dr. Jasbir Kaur PW-2 who had examined Pinki in the beginning at her clinic at Uchana stated that on 18-3-1997, Pinki aged 6 years was brought to her clinic. She found one injury on her perineal region. This injury was on the outer perineum. This injury was on the outer portion of her vagina. She referred Pinki to civil hospital. She did not examine the injury with a view to find if it could be the result of rape or attempted rape. She gave treatment to Pinki for pain in her abdomen, Dr. SS Saroha, Medical Officer, PHC PW-8 examined Dalbir s/o Ram Dia aged 18 years on 22-3-1997 at 5, 30 P.M. and found no external mark of injury on him. There was no staining of clothing. Sexual characters like pubic hair, axillary hair were well developed. External genitalia was well developed. SS Saroha, Medical Officer, PHC PW-8 examined Dalbir s/o Ram Dia aged 18 years on 22-3-1997 at 5, 30 P.M. and found no external mark of injury on him. There was no staining of clothing. Sexual characters like pubic hair, axillary hair were well developed. External genitalia was well developed. There was no genitalia injury. In his opinion, there was nothing to suggest that Dalbir was unable to perform sexual intercourse. He took into possession pubic hair and the under-wear of the accused. He made pubic hair into a sealed parcel. Similarly, he made his under wear into a sealed parcel. Sealed parcels were handed over to the police. 3. On 19-3-1997, Dr. Renu Saroha was posted as Medical Officer, General Hospital, Uchana PW-11, Pinki was produced before her. Her tears were already stitched by her. She was referred to general hospital, Jind for expert opinion and management. 4. Chemical examiner detected semen on the under-wear of Pinki. No semen was detected on vaginal swabs. Blood was detected on vaginal swabs. No blood was detected on the pubic hair and under-wear of the accused. 5. On 19-3-1997 a medical board comprising Dr. Madhulika Sood and Dr. Savita Singhal medico-legally examined Pinki aged 5 years, Dr. Savita Singhal PW-10 stated that after having a look on the report of chemical examiner, they were of the opinion that possibility of sexual intercourse having been committed on Pinki could not be ruled out. As per report Ex. PC of the chemical examiner, human semen was detected on Ex. P-1 under-wear but it could not be detected on Ex. P-2 swab Exs. P-3a (swab), and 3b (swab), Ex.-4a and Ex. 4b (pubic hair). Underwear Ex. P1 was stained with a few large and small blood stains in its lower middle and blood could not be detected on Ex.-2 (swab), Ex.-4a (under wear) and Ex. 4b (pubic hair) of the accused. It is also mentioned in this report that Ex-1 was one red colour terricot underwear stained with a few large and small darkish blood stains in the lower middle and Ex.-4a was one blue coloured terricot underwear. As per the findings of this medical board recorded in report Ex. PL/1 there was second degree perineal tear and para uretheral tear. Dr. Savita Singhal PW-10 stated that injury could be caused by penetration of the male organ into the vagina. 6. As per the findings of this medical board recorded in report Ex. PL/1 there was second degree perineal tear and para uretheral tear. Dr. Savita Singhal PW-10 stated that injury could be caused by penetration of the male organ into the vagina. 6. After investigation, accused was challanged under Section 376, IPC. Case was committed to the Court of Session by Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Narwana vide order dated 17-7-1997. 7. At the conclusion of the trial Dalbir was convicted and sentenced by learned Sessions Judge, Jind as indicated above vide order dated 1-2-1999. 8. Accused has knocked the door of this Court through this criminal appeal and has prayed for his acquittal. 9. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant, learned AAG for the State of Haryana and have gone through the record. 10. Pinki (prosecutrix) PW-13 stated that her grandmother Jashoda and Ram Parvesh had come for labour work at the brick kiln. She, her grandmother and Ram Parvesh had gone to pick wood. Her grandmother Jashoda and Ram Parvesh were picking wood at some distance from the place where she was picking up wood. Dalbir (accused) came and took her inside a kothri. He removed her under-wear and outraged her modesty. She cried. Her grandmother and Ram Parvesh came there. On seeking them Dalbir left her and ran away. Her private part was torn and blood had come out. In her cross-examination, the suggestion was that it was some body else and not the accused who had outraged her modesty. Another suggestion to her was that she had received injuries with wood. Ram Parvesh PW-12 gave eye-witness account of the commission of rape upon Pinki by the accused. He stated that he and Jashoda grandmother of Pinki heard the cries of Pinki. They went towards the kothri from which the cries of Pinki were emanating. They saw the accused raping Pinki whose under-wear was lying removed. 11. Result of medical examination of Pinki by a medical board comprising Dr. Renu Aggarwal and Dr. Manjula Bansal on 19-3-1997 at General Hospital, Jind suggests that Pinki was raped. If Pinki had not been raped, there would have been no contusion over perineal and medial side of thigh. There would have been no laceration over clitoris and urethera on right side. Renu Aggarwal and Dr. Manjula Bansal on 19-3-1997 at General Hospital, Jind suggests that Pinki was raped. If Pinki had not been raped, there would have been no contusion over perineal and medial side of thigh. There would have been no laceration over clitoris and urethera on right side. If Pinki had not been raped, she would not have felt intense pain on insertion of finger in her vagina. As she was feeling intense pain on insertion of finger, per vagina examination could not be carried out. Presence of wound which was perineal tear extending up to anal orifice also suggests that Pinki was raped. 12. Pinkis medical examination at PGIMS Rohtak by medical board comprising Dr. Madhulika Sood and Dr. Savita Singhal also suggests that she had been raped. 13. Why should there have been stains of semen on the under-wear of Pinki and why should there have been large and small blood stains on swabs? As per the finding of medical board comprising Dr. Savita Singhal and Dr. Madhulika Sood, there was second degree perineal tear and para uretheral tear. This also suggests that Pinki was raped. 14. Accused when examined under Section 313, Cr.P.C. stated that he was innocent. He did not offer any explanation so far as the state of the vagina of Pinki was concerned and the presence of semen and stains of blood on her underwear. 15. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that there is no evidence that it was accused and none else but the accused who committed rape on her. Doctor did not find any injury on any part of the body of the accused. Doctor did not find any injury on his genitalia. He did not find any staining of his clothing. It was also submitted that if he had committed rape on Pinki, there would have been some injury on his male organ. 16. Suffice it to say, it may not have been complete penetration of the male organ into the narrow vagina of Pinki, who was only 5/6 years of age. If there had been serious effort by the accused at penetrating his penis into the narrow vagina of Pinki, there would have been injury on his penis. Absence of injury on his penis suggests that there may not have been full penetration but only partial penetration into the narrow vagina of Pinki. If there had been serious effort by the accused at penetrating his penis into the narrow vagina of Pinki, there would have been injury on his penis. Absence of injury on his penis suggests that there may not have been full penetration but only partial penetration into the narrow vagina of Pinki. Rape is defined in Section 375, IPC as under : "375-Rape : A man is said to commit "rape" who, except in the case hereinafter excepted, has sexual intercourse with a woman under circumstances falling under any of the six following descriptions- First - Against her will. Secondly - Without her consent. Thirdly - With her consent, when her consent has been obtained by putting her on any person in whom she is interested in fear of death or of. Fourthly - With her consent, when the man knows that he is not her husband, and that her consent is given because she believes that he is another man to whom she is or believes herself to be lawfully married. Fifth - With her consent, when, at the time of giving such consent, by reason of unsoundness of mind or intoxication or the administration by him personally or through another of any stupefying or unwholesome substance, she is unable to understand the nature and consequences of that to which she gives consent. Sixthly - With or without her consent, when she is under sixteen years of age. Explanation- Penetration is sufficient to constitute the sexual intercourse necessary to the offence of rape. Exception- Sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under fifteen years of age, is not rape. 17. It was held by Hon ble Supreme Court in Madan Gopal Kakkad V/s. Naval Dubey, 1992 (2) Criminal Court Judgments 545 that penetration, however, slight is sufficient for constituting the offence of rape. 18. For constituting the offence of rape, it is not necessary that there should be full penetration of the male organ into the vagina. 19. It was held in Rahul Pundalik Birahade V/s. State of Maharashtra, (2002) 2 Rec Cri R 344 that slight penetration of penis into the vagina is sufficient to complete the offence of rape. It is not necessary that there should be complete penetration of penis, emission of semen and rupture of hymen. 20. 19. It was held in Rahul Pundalik Birahade V/s. State of Maharashtra, (2002) 2 Rec Cri R 344 that slight penetration of penis into the vagina is sufficient to complete the offence of rape. It is not necessary that there should be complete penetration of penis, emission of semen and rupture of hymen. 20. In this case, it was not an attempt at rape but rape on Pinki a girl aged 5/6 years, as if there had been no penetration of penis of the accused into the narrow vagina of Pinki, there would have been no injury to the vagina of Pinki. 21. Faced with this position, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that Pinkis statement before the Court was not spontaneous. It was a tutored statement that she made before the Court. In support of this submission, he drew my attention to the cross-examination of Pinki where she has stated that whatever the police has told her she has deposed in Court. Her statement was recorded on 6-11-1998. She was a child of aged 6/7 years. She was raped on 18-3-1997. 22. I do not think it will detract from the truth of her statement if her memory was refreshed before she entered into the witness box on 6-11-1998. She belongs to lower strata of the society. She was not studying. As we know, with education memory is sharpened and there is development of intellect. When Pinki was not receiving any education, it cannot be said that hers was a sharp memory and she could depose to the details of the occurrence without her memory being refreshed. She has clearly deposed to the commission of rape on her by the accused. She stated that as a result of commission of rape on her, her private parts were torn and blood came out. She is corroborated by Ram Parvesh PW-12 that it was accused who committed rape on Pinki. Fact that Pinki was raped is suggested by the state of her vagina, which was brought out in the medical testimony of the aforesaid PWs. 23. In this case no leniency can be shown to the accused as he is a full grown adult. He made a hapless girl aged 5/6 the object of his sexual lust and carnal pleasure. Fact that Pinki was raped is suggested by the state of her vagina, which was brought out in the medical testimony of the aforesaid PWs. 23. In this case no leniency can be shown to the accused as he is a full grown adult. He made a hapless girl aged 5/6 the object of his sexual lust and carnal pleasure. He ought to have known that by attempting at thrusting his full grown penis into the narrow vagina of girl aged 5/6 years old, he would be causing severe damage of her vagina. He is a savage and a brute having no regard for decency and cultural behaviour, peculiar to the civilised world. 24. Rape is not a crime against the person of a woman (victim), it is a crime against the entire society. It destroys the entire psychology of a woman and pushes her into deep emotional crisis. It is only by her sheer will-power that she rehabilitates herself in the society which, on coming to know of the rape, looks down upon her in derision and contempt. Rape is, therefore, the most hated crime. It is a crime against basic human rights and is also violative of the victims most cherished of the fundamental rights, namely the right to life contained in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. To many feminists and psychiatrists rape is less a sexual offence than an act of aggression aimed at degrading and humiliating women. The rape laws do not unfortunately take care of the social aspect of the matter and are inept in many respects. These observations were made by the Hon ble Supreme Court of India in Bodhisattwa Gautam V/s. Subhra Chakraborti, 1996 SCC (Cri) 133 . Women deserve the esteem of the society. They are mother, daughter, sister, and wife and not play things. 25. So far as sentence imposed upon the accused is concerned, that cannot be slashed at all in view of the provisions of Section 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code, where under sentence imposed cannot be less than 10 years but it may be for life, in addition to fine if the woman raped is less than 12 years old. 26. For the reasons given above, this appeal fails and is dismissed.