Judgment K.S.Garewal, J. 1. "Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high ..............." (opening verse of a school prayer composed by Rabindranath Tagore) This case tells the story of a small girl who may never be able to rid her mind of fear or hold her head high. On the night of February 27, 1995, Sheela (9) a student of Class I, was taken away by Narotam (25) from a cluster of huts in Dhaluwal, a village 4 kms from Pinjore. The child was taken to an abandoned hut in the dry bed of the river Ghaggar and where she was raped by Narotam. The accused was arrested and tried by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala who vide judgment dated March 8/9, 1996 found him guilty and convicted him under Section 376 IPC. The accused was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default of payment of fine he was to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 years. 2. Sheela lived with her parents Shish Pal (PW-4) and Sona Devi (PW-6) in a hut in Dhaluwal near Pinjore. The family originally belonged to Gaziabad (U.P.) and were labourers who had come in search of work to Pinjore, Sheela (PW-2) had been a student in the Government Primary School at the nearby village Bhagwanpur. Sheelas date of birth recorded in the school record was June 5, 1987. In February 1995 Sheelas age would have been 4 months short of 8 years. 3. On the evening of February 27, 1995 marriage of one Babu Lals sister was being celebrated in Dhaluwal. The barat had come from U.P. Sheela left her hut at about 6 P.M. and went to see the marriage party near a local hotel - a small girl no doubt attracted by flashing lights and musics beat. It was at that place that the accused met her and took her away to the abandoned hut in the Ghaggar where "he pressed my neck and sat upon me. He caught hold of my hands. He had committed wrong work with me. I was putting on salwar and jersey at that time. He removed my salwar. Blood came from the stomach" (testimony of Sheela PW-2 recorded by learned Trial Judge on July 27, 1995). Sheela returned home weeping at 9.00 P.M. holding her salwar in her hand. He caught hold of my hands. He had committed wrong work with me. I was putting on salwar and jersey at that time. He removed my salwar. Blood came from the stomach" (testimony of Sheela PW-2 recorded by learned Trial Judge on July 27, 1995). Sheela returned home weeping at 9.00 P.M. holding her salwar in her hand. When her parents enquired from her she replied that one person had taken her and thereafter she became unconscious. Sheelas mother changed her clothes and found blood coming out from her vagina. Since it was raining, her parents were unable to take her any where in the night. On the following morning Sheelas parents informed Duli Chand and Todi Ram (PW-5) who took them to the General Hospital at Pinjore where she was medico-legally examined by Dr. Supriya Gupta (PW-1). The Medical Officer sent a report regarding Sheelas arrival, with injury on her neck and blood-stained discharge per vagina, to S.H.O. P.S. Pinjore at 1.00 P.M. on February 28, 1995. 4. However, in the meantime Sheelas father Shish Pal had already reached the Police Station where his statement was recorded at 12.15 P.M. on February 28, 1995 and F.I.R. was registered. In the F.I.R. the name of the rapist had been mentioned. 5. Sheelas medico-legal examination was conducted on March 1, 1995 by Dr. Darshan, at Civil Dispensary, Baldev Nagar, Ambala City. The Medical Officer reported that her general condition was fair. She was fully conscious and was talking. In the case history the Medical Officer recorded that at a marriage party one adult had kidnapped the girl and performed coitus and then strangulated her and when she became unconscious he left her in the fields and ran way. After a few hours when she regained consciousness she came to her house alone at 9.00 P.M. on the same day (night) i.e. February 27, 1995. The Medical Officer noticed an abrasion 2" x 1/2" on the middle of the neck. The area was swollen and tender and scar was present. On vaginal examination, hymen was found to be torn, fresh bleeding was present and post vaginal wall had minor abrasion and the salwar was stained with blood and this was the second salwar which she had worn. Vaginal swabs were taken and sealed. 6. The accused was produced before the police by Tota Ram on March 3, 1993. On vaginal examination, hymen was found to be torn, fresh bleeding was present and post vaginal wall had minor abrasion and the salwar was stained with blood and this was the second salwar which she had worn. Vaginal swabs were taken and sealed. 6. The accused was produced before the police by Tota Ram on March 3, 1993. On interrogation he disclosed that he had concealed his pants and shirt in his hut and could get them recovered. His statement was recorded and on its basis the police party got the pants and shirt recovered from his hut. 7. Accused was also medico-legally examined by Dr. Parjesh Khera (PW-7) at Primary Health Centre, Pinjore. The Medical Officer found that there was nothing to suggest that the accused was unable to perform sexual intercourse. Underwear of the accused was taken and sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory for examination. The Scientific Officer at laboratory detected human semen on the pyjami of the victim and also traces of blood which were too small for serological analysis. Human semen was detected on pants and kuchha. However, no blood could be detected on these exhibits. No blood or semen was detected on the frock/shirt of the victim or on the vaginal swabs or shirt of the accused. 8. After completion of the investigation accused was sent up to face trial. He was charged under Section 376 IPC to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Prosecution examined Dr. Supriya Gupta (PW-1), Sheela (PW-2), Dr. Darshan (PW-3), Shish Pal (PW-4), Todi Ram (PW-5), Sona Devi (PW-6), Dr. Prajesh Khera (PW-7), ASI Rameshwar Dass (PW-8), S.I. Hari Kailash (PW-9), Wajinder Singh (PW-10) and Charan Singh Patwari (PW-11). 9. Accused was examined without oath under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Accused admitted that on February 27, 1995 marriage of Babu Lals sister was being celebrated at Dhaluwal and the barat had come from U.P. Accused also admitted that during those days he lived in Dhaluwal and was previously known to Sheelas father. He used to visit Sheelas house but he denied the other items that appeared in the prosecution evidence against him. In defence accused pleaded as follows :- "I had a quarrel with the father of the prosecutrix who demanded money from me as he had been earlier getting money from me on various occasions. When I failed to oblige him, he threatened me with dire consequences. In defence accused pleaded as follows :- "I had a quarrel with the father of the prosecutrix who demanded money from me as he had been earlier getting money from me on various occasions. When I failed to oblige him, he threatened me with dire consequences. I was not involved in this occurrence. The police picked me up from among the villagers on 28.2.1995 and planted this case on me even though my name was not mentioned in the FIR. The prosecutrix was examined by the medical officer three days afterwards in Ambala City and she did not name me as one of the persons who had committed this crime." 10. The learned trial Judge accepted the prosecution evidence, found the accused guilty of rape and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. 11. The judgment of conviction dated March 8/9, 1996 was challenged by the accused through an appeal lodged through Superintendent, Central Jail, Ambala on August 25, 1998. The admitting Bench had condoned the delay in filing the appeal and admitted the appeal on December 7, 1998. 12. We have gone through the record of the Trial Court and have carefully examined the statements of witnesses including those of Sheela (PW-2), her parents Shish Pal (PW-4) and Sona Devi (PW-6). We find that the witnesses have in a forth-right manner stated that the accused had committed the offence of rape on Sheela. Sheela was examined in Court on voir dire and stated that there was a marriage near the hotel where the accused met her and took her to a hut where he committed wrong act with her. Accused removed her salwar and Sheela started bleeding (she pointed to her vagina to show from where blood had come out). 13. The above statement is fully corroborated by Sheelas parents Shish Pal (PW-4) and Sona Devi (PW-6) who unanimously stated that Sheela returned home at 9.00 P.M. Her clothes were wet as it had been raining. When Shish Pal enquired from her reason for coming late, she became unconscious. Witnesses noticed blood on her salwar. Sheela told her father that one person had taken her from barat and she was raped. Sheelas clothes were blood-stained and her mother changed her clothes. Similar was the statement given by Sheelas mother. 14. The account of the witnesses is also corroborated by the medical evidence of Dr. Witnesses noticed blood on her salwar. Sheela told her father that one person had taken her from barat and she was raped. Sheelas clothes were blood-stained and her mother changed her clothes. Similar was the statement given by Sheelas mother. 14. The account of the witnesses is also corroborated by the medical evidence of Dr. Supriya Gupta (PW-1) who first examined Sheela on the following day at 1.30 P.M. and had noticed an injury mark on neck and blood- stained discharge per vagina. Dr. Darshan medico-legally examined Sheela on March 1, 1995 at 1.45 P.M. and found evidence of rape. 15. The defence cross-examined Sheela and suggested to her that it was not Narotam but some other person who had taken her to the hut, the suggestion was denied. It was also suggested to Sheela that a scuffle had taken place between her parents and Narotam over money and Sheelas father had threatened Narotam to falsely implicate in some case. This suggestion was also denied. Apart from this nothing substantial emerged in Sheelas cross-examination. 16. When Shish Pal was cross-examined he stated that Sheela had told him in the morning that the accused had raped her. She had revealed this before going to the hospital. However, Shish Pal admitted that he had not disclosed the name of the person who had raped his daughter to the police even though he had come to know who that person was. The witness was confronted with the omission to name the accused in his statement to the police where he stated that some unknown person had committed rape. Further in cross-examination Shish Pal stated that Narotam was also a labourer who lived in the same locality and was known to him. Narotam also used to visit his house. It was suggested to Shish Pal that he was in the habit of drinking liquor which he denied. He also admitted that an altercation had taken place between him and Narotam about a money transaction, 10 days before the occurrence. The witness denied this as well. 17. When Sona Devi (PW-6) was cross-examined she stated that they belonged to U.P. and she was married to Shish Pal in U.P. although she did not remember the date. Sona also admitted that Sheela was born in U.P. On the night of the occurrence it had rained throughout night. Rain had started after arrival of barat. 17. When Sona Devi (PW-6) was cross-examined she stated that they belonged to U.P. and she was married to Shish Pal in U.P. although she did not remember the date. Sona also admitted that Sheela was born in U.P. On the night of the occurrence it had rained throughout night. Rain had started after arrival of barat. Sheela had gone to see barat at 6/7 P.M. but Sona Devi had not gone in search of Sheela. When Sheela returned it was raining. Sheela told her mother in the morning about what had happened. Sona Devi was confronted with her statement made to the police where she had stated that some unknown person had committed rape on her daughter. 18. Furthermore Tody Ram (PW-5) also testified that on the night of February 27, 1995 at 8.30 P.M. when he was returning from the river after easing himself he saw the accused taking Sheela with him. The witness returned home and went to sleep but the next morning he came to know that Sheela had been raped. The witness was cross-examined but nothing substantial came out in cross-examination. 19. The only arguable point which the counsel for the appellant put forth was regarding his identity and the fact that his name had not been mentioned in the FIR. But these are minor defects. The accused lived in the same locality, was known to the witnesses and had been on visiting terms with Sushilas father. It is possible that in the beginning the witnesses may not have known the identity of the culprit but the identity was confirmed when the police arrested the accused and brought him to the village where Sheela identified accused. Sheela had no hesitation in identifying the accused in Court. Inspite of what Sheela had experienced, she was not afraid of giving a statement in Court in the presence of the man who had raped her. Statement of Sheela inspired full confidence. The medical evidence fully corroborated the statement of the victim. Furthermore, the forensic evidence showed presence of semen on the clothes of the accused and also on the pyjami of the victim. DNA matching was not done but in the light of overwhelming evidence against the accused the absence of DNA evidence to establish presence of semen of the accused on the clothes of the victim will not make much difference. 20. DNA matching was not done but in the light of overwhelming evidence against the accused the absence of DNA evidence to establish presence of semen of the accused on the clothes of the victim will not make much difference. 20. We find no merit in this appeal because evidence of the prosecution was fully corroborated by medical and forensic evidence. Narotam had committed a serious crime and deserved to be given severe punishment. However, his act did not inflict any grievous bodily harm to the victim even though he did press her neck. Nevertheless the extent of psychological harm cannot be measured. We are of the view that sentence of life should be reduced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years without remissions, furlough or parole. The appellant must undergo rigorous imprisonment for full 10 years. He shall also pay fine of Rs. 25,000/-, in default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. 21. There is an important aspect of the case which we would like to consider to since this is a case where an act of extreme sexual perversity was committed on a helpless girl of 7+. Physical injuries heal with time but psychological scars often never heal and leave behind permanent damage. We are not aware of any programme or strategy devised by the State or any N.G.O. to provide assistance to victims of rape/sexual assault to unable them to overcome their personal crisis. 22. Rape is a violent act and may be committed by a stranger, friend or an acquaintance. Rape causes extreme emotional and personal injuries as well as physical injuries which are often quite serious. Victims of rape suffer from all kinds of physical reactions like sleeping problems (oversleeping or insomia), nightmares, headaches, body aches, flashbacks, uncontrolable crying etc. Victims may also suffer from feelings of guilt, anger, distrust, anxiety, fear, low self-esteem, depression, confusion, helplessness, shame and shock. Rape victims amy undergo personality changes, withdrawal from social activities, may show self-destructive behaviour or suicidal tendencies, withdrawal from family and friends, may become unable to concentrate on studies or perform routine activities and often suffer from forgetfulness. 23. Rape victims overcome the crisis by moving through three stages of recovery. They feel shock which usually leaves them overwhelmed and drained of feelings. 23. Rape victims overcome the crisis by moving through three stages of recovery. They feel shock which usually leaves them overwhelmed and drained of feelings. The next is the stage of recoil where some or most of the above mentioned feelings suddenly flood back. The final stage of recovery is integration which involves putting things behind and stating a new life. 24. Rape victims must be given immediate assistance to enable them to overcome their personal crisis. We strongly urge the State Government to devise a suitable "Victim Assistance Programme" in every Sessions Division under Sub- Divisional Magistrates in collaboration with the District Legal Service Authority to assist victims of rape. The programme should advise them as regards their rights, help them in the registration of the case before the police, arrange medical help for treatment, for preparation of the medico- legal reports and also provide a trained social worker (female) to give constant counselling and emotional support to the victims. Further, it is suggested that the programme should be elective and should not be forced upon victim who do not wish to seek its benefit for the reason of privacy. 25. In view of the above discussion, appeal qua conviction is dismissed but for reasons as indicated above, sentence is reduced from life to ten years. The appellant shall also pay a fine of Rs. 25,000/-, in default of payment of fine, the appellant shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. Fine shall be paid to Sheela (PW-2) as compensation.