Judgment Virender Singh, J. 1. Yet another case of child rape. Malkiat Singh the appellant is aged about 32/33 years (as per charge-sheet). He was booked in a case bearing FIR No. 25 dated 8.6.1995 under Section 376 IPC registered at police station Hajipur (District Hoshiarpur) for allegedly committing rape on 7.6.1995 upon the daughter of Ram Singh (PW-5) aged about 5 years in village Bela Sariana. He now stands convicted for the said charge vide impugned judgment of learned Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur dated 7.8.1996 and has been awarded life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default thereof to further undergo RI for six months. Challenging the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence he is before us in this appeal. 2. As per the observations made in a very latest judgment rendered by Honble the Apex Court in State of Karnataka v. Puttaraja, 2004(1) RCR(Crl.) 113, the name of the prosecutrix is not being indicated by us. She is therefore described as `victim. 3. Ram Singh (PW-5), father of the victim approached SHO Jaswant Singh PW-10 of Police Station, Hajipur (District Hoshiarpur) and made a statement, on the basis of which, a formal FIR Ex. PH/2 was recorded against the appellant under Section 376/342 IPC. The statement Exh. PH when translated into English runs thus : "Statement of Ram Singh son of Bishan Dass, caste Chagh, resident of village Bela Sariana, Nawen Ghar, P.S. Hajipur, Hoshiarpur, aged about 37 years. I am resident of village Bela Sariana and am in service in Mukerian Power House. I have three children. Out of them two are daughters and one son. The daughter Paramjit Kaur is my second child and she is aged about 5 years. Yesterday in the evening at about 6 P.M. she had left the house for bringing water from the handpump. When she returned home after sufficient time, she was weeping and her private parts were bleeding. My wife did not bother much under the impression that she might have fallen on the stones. When I returned home in the evening after being free from my duty, she talked to me. Then, I took my daughter to a doctor near my village and after checking, the doctor told me that rape has been committed upon my daughter. My wife did not bother much under the impression that she might have fallen on the stones. When I returned home in the evening after being free from my duty, she talked to me. Then, I took my daughter to a doctor near my village and after checking, the doctor told me that rape has been committed upon my daughter. After coming to the village on enquiry it revealed that my daughter Paramjit Kaur was taken away by Malkiat Singh son of Jagdish Ram, caste Chagh resident of Hajipur from the handpump, by holding from her fingers and he has committed rape upon my daughter Paramjit Kaur, who is aged about 5 years. The whole of the occurrence was witnessed by Sarwan Singh son of Tota Ram, caste Chagh, resident of Village with his own eyes. My daughter is in semi conscious condition since yesterday and she is not speaking anything. Excess has been done with my daughter. Proper action may be taken. Treatment was given by Dr. Darhsan Singh of V. Handwal, yesterday, the 7th day of June, 1995. On being disclosed by the doctor that the girl had been subjected to rape, I was going to the police station to make report, when you have met. Action may be taken. Sd/- Ram Singh aforesaid (In Hindi) Attested Sd/- Jaswant Singh Insp. 8.6.1995." 4. SHO Jaswant Singh PW-10 immediately sent the victim for medical examination to the Civil Hospital, Hajipur along with Sunder Lal ASI (not examined) where she was initially examined by Dr. Darshan Singh PW-7. It needs to be mentioned here that prior to the examination of the victim by the concerned doctors of Civil Hospital, one Dr. Darshan Singh PW-7 Medical Practitioner of village Handwal had already examined her at 9.30 P.M. and observed that she was unconscious and was bleeding from her private part. Her father Ram Singh PW-5 was with her at that time. After giving some medical aid, she was advised to be taken to the hospital for treatment. Dr. Kamaljit Kaur PW-2 then examined her on 8.6.1996 and prepared her Medico Legal Report Ex. PA. She also gave her opinion Ex. PD after receipt of the report from the Chemical Examiner Ex. PC to the effect that rape had been committed upon her. 5. A rough site plan of the place of occurrence Ex. PM was prepared by SHO PW-10. PA. She also gave her opinion Ex. PD after receipt of the report from the Chemical Examiner Ex. PC to the effect that rape had been committed upon her. 5. A rough site plan of the place of occurrence Ex. PM was prepared by SHO PW-10. He also recorded the statements of Dil Kaur, Sarwan Singh and Dr. Darshan Singh. During the investigation, the underwear Ex. P-1 and frock Ex. P-2 of the victim were also taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex. PJ. 6. It revealed during the investigation that the appellant was unmarried at the time of occurrence and was working as a labourer. 7. After completion of the investigation the appellant was challaned and he was charged under Section 376 IPC. Witnesses of medical evidence 8. The prosecution has examined the following witnesses in support of its case : (i) Dr. Jaskaran Singh Gill PW-1 had referred the victim to the gynae ward for treatment. (ii) Dr. Kamajit Kaur PW-2 had medico-legally examined the victim on 8.6.1995. At that time, she was conscious. The doctor found the following injuries on her person : 1. Abrasion 1 cm x 1/2 cm present on the left cheek 3 cm. lateral to the angle of mouth obliquely placed. Reddish brown crust present. 2. Abrasion 2 cm. in diameter present on the left side of upper part of the neck, 4 cm. below the pinna of left ear. Reddish brown crust present on the periphery, oozing from central part of the abrasion. 3. Contusion inverted U-shaped on the right side of the upper part of the neck 4 cm. below the right pinna. Reddish blue in colour. 4. Contusion 2 cm in diameter on the left side of labia majora in the lower part, reddish blue in colour. 5. Contusion 2 cm. in diameter on the right side of labia majora in the lower part, reddish blue in colour. 6. Vulva was swollen, Tear of lower part of vulva at the fourchette, extending to the prenium in the centre upto the anterior part of anus 1 cm. deep. Examination was done after the removal of 4 silk thread stitches. Bleeding on touch present. Vaginal swabs showed no spermatozoa on miscroscopic examination. This witness has proved the MLR prepared by her and her opinion Ex. PD regarding the rape. (iii) Dr. deep. Examination was done after the removal of 4 silk thread stitches. Bleeding on touch present. Vaginal swabs showed no spermatozoa on miscroscopic examination. This witness has proved the MLR prepared by her and her opinion Ex. PD regarding the rape. (iii) Dr. Parmodh Rishi PW-3 had examined Malkiat Singh and found that he is fit to perform sexual intercourse. (iv) PW-7 Dr. Darshan Singh had examined the victim on 7.6.1995 at 9.30 P.M. and referred her for treatment. Other material evidence 9. PW-4, Madan Lal is Patwari Halqa Bela Sariana, who prepared the scale plan Ex. P-10 of the place of occurrence. 10. PW-5, Ram Singh father of victim, reiterates facts which were stated by him before PW-10 SHO Jaswant Singh in his statement Ex. PH. He also narrates the age of the victim on the basis of the birth certificate Ex. PG (The exact date of birth is 23.5.1991). 11. PW-6 Sarwan Singh states that on 7.6.1995 at about 5 P.M. when he was going to his fields, he saw the appellant taking the victim at the handpump situated along with the path. When he came back from his fields he saw that the victim was being carried by her mother and at that time she was unconscious. He talks of making a statement before the police as well to the same effect. 12. The victim has been examined as PW-9. Before her statement was recorded, the learned trial Court exempted her swearing on oath as the witness did not know the sanctity and the implications of the oath. 13. We feel the necessity of reproducing the entire statement as it is and the same runs thus: Q. Do you know Malkiat Singh accused present in the court, and pointed out to you ? Ans. Yes. Q. Did he misbehave with you ? Ans. Yes. He had opened my underwear and my private parts had bled. Q. From where had he taken you ? Ans. From near the water pump towards Nala. x x x x x x x x x x It is wrong that I have been tutored to make a statement today. It is wrong that accused had not raped me. Yes. He had opened my underwear and my private parts had bled. Q. From where had he taken you ? Ans. From near the water pump towards Nala. x x x x x x x x x x It is wrong that I have been tutored to make a statement today. It is wrong that accused had not raped me. Note : The witness was brought to the court room by her father and in view of her weak constitution, she was allowed to be lifted into the witness box by her father at the time of recording her statement, but the father of the girl had not in any manner prompted her or interfered in her examination-in-chief, or cross-examination. RO&AC7.2.1996 Sd/- Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur 14 Jaswant Singh PW-10 is the Investigating Officer of the case. The investigation conducted by him detailed by us in the proceeding paras. 15. Besides this the chemical report Ex. PO and the report of the Serologist Ex. PQ/1 were also tendered by the prosecution. 16. The stand taken by the appellant is of false implication asserting that about 5 days prior to the alleged occurrence he had a quarrel with Sarwan Singh PW-6 and at his instance, he has been implicated in this case. In defence, the appellant has produced one Ram Kumar son of Sudarshan Kumar who states that Sarwan Singh son of Tota Ram had a fight with the appellant on account of striking his cycle and in that altercation the appellant had given thrashing to Sarwan Singh. 17. After appreciating the entire evidence, the appellant stands convicted and sentenced as indicated above. 18. We have heard Mr. T.P.S. Mann, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. J.S. Bedi, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. With their assistance we have also gone through the entire record. The other relevant documents from the trial Court file have also been perused by us. 19. Mr. Mann contends that there is a delay in lodging the FIR as the occurrence had allegedly taken place on 7.6.1995 and the statement of Ram Singh, father of the victim (PW-5) has been recorded on 8.6.1995. According to the prosecution case the victim had become unconscious and she was not even able to talk upto the next date i.e. 8.6.1995, when an application was moved by the Investigating Officer to obtain the fitness certificate. According to the prosecution case the victim had become unconscious and she was not even able to talk upto the next date i.e. 8.6.1995, when an application was moved by the Investigating Officer to obtain the fitness certificate. In this situation Ram Singh, her father could not possibly know the name of the appellant and subsequently he has been implicated in this case at the instance of some one who was inimical towards him. According to the learned counsel, this material infirmity dents the prosecution case regarding the culpability of the present appellant. 20. Mr. Mann then contends that it is even otherwise improbable that the appellant had committed rape in the day time and that too near the abadi. It is clear from the statement of PW-7 Dr. Darshan Singh who had examined the victim at the first instance and it had come to his notice from the persons accompanying the victim were under the impression that the girl might have sustained injuries due to fall on the stones and this resulted into bleeding from her vigina. From this all, learned counsel wants to develop his arguments saying that nothing had happened with the girl (victim) and she in fact has been tutored to come up with a false story in order to implicate the present appellant. He then contends that when the victim appeared in the Court, she even was not in a position to give answer to the queries put by the Court and this indicates that she was turtored by some outer agency, may be her father or any one else. Her statement is not convincing and thus merits rejection. 21. The learned counsel then contends that the defence has been totally ignored by the trial Court. 22. On the basis of aforesaid submissions, the learned counsel submits that there is not a shred of evidence against the appellant and he deserves acquittal. 23. In the alternative, the learned counsel prays for reduction in the quantum of sentence. 21. The learned counsel then contends that the defence has been totally ignored by the trial Court. 22. On the basis of aforesaid submissions, the learned counsel submits that there is not a shred of evidence against the appellant and he deserves acquittal. 23. In the alternative, the learned counsel prays for reduction in the quantum of sentence. He submitted that the appellant was of the age of 32/33 years at the time of alleged occurrence; he has suffered the agony of protracted trial as the occurrence relates to year 1995; he is on bail as his sentence was suspended by this Court after he remained in custody for some time; he has a good previous record and awarding the life imprisonment to the appellant would be a harsh punishment. 24. Countering the arguments of Mr. Mann, learned State counsel contends that the case of the prosecution is not suffering from any weakness on any count. It is supported by the medical evidence available on the file. Learned counsel then contends that otherwise if there is no corroboration to the statement of the prosecutrix, it would not be a ground to infer that the charge against the appellant is not proved as there is no reason to disbelieve the victim who has deposed against the appellant. 25. On the point of quantum, learned counsel submits that the appellant does not deserve any sympathy from this Court as he has crossed all the limits of decency and picked up a child of 5 years to satisfy his lust. 26. After giving our thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions of either side, we are of the considered view that the conviction as recorded by the trial Court deserves to be upheld. We now enter into a detailed discussion. 27. In our opinion there is no delay in lodging the first information report by Ram Singh, father of the victim. The occurrence is stated to have taken place on 7.6.1995 at 5.00 P.M. The victim was found unconscious. She returned home weeping. Her mother at that time was under the impression that she might have fallen on the stones. When Ram Singh returned home in the evening, his wife talked with him and he then took his daughter to Dr. Darshan Singh near his village and after checking, Dr. told him that in fact rape has been committed upon her. Her mother at that time was under the impression that she might have fallen on the stones. When Ram Singh returned home in the evening, his wife talked with him and he then took his daughter to Dr. Darshan Singh near his village and after checking, Dr. told him that in fact rape has been committed upon her. It is only then that Ram Singh started enquiring into the matter and it was revealed to him that his daughter was taken away by the appellant from the handpump by holding her fingers and thereafter she was subjected to rape. We do not find anything unnatural in what is said by Ram Singh. In her rustic simplicity the mother could not even dream that her daughter was raped by some one though she was bleeding from her private part. The father also got the same impression. This appears to be the reason that they took their daughter who was in serious condition to Dr. Darshan Singh. When Dr. Darshan Singh apprised them of the state of things and advised them to take her to lady doctor and as such she was removed to S.G.T.B. Hospital, Amritsar. Ram Singh then started getting the information and then came to know from Sarwan Singh about the happening. Ram Singh has stated the facts in simple before SHO Jaswant Singh on 8.6.1995 when he went to the police station to lodge the complaint. At that time his daughter was in semi-conscious condition and was not speaking out anything. In our considered view, Ram Singh has not wasted any time in lodging the FIR. At any rate such delay will not at all be fatal in setting the police machinery in motion. 28. The most important witness in this case is the victim herself. Her statement in the Court has already been reproduced by us above. Since she was of a weak constitution, she was allowed to be lifted by her father. The observation of the trial Court is that the father of the girl has not prompted her in any manner to give her examination-in-chief or cross-examination. She pointed out her finger towards appellant only and stated that he had played the mischief with her. At the cost of repetition, the relevant portion from her statement is reproduced : 29. The observation of the trial Court is that the father of the girl has not prompted her in any manner to give her examination-in-chief or cross-examination. She pointed out her finger towards appellant only and stated that he had played the mischief with her. At the cost of repetition, the relevant portion from her statement is reproduced : 29. Q. Do you know Malkiat Singh accused present in the court, and pointed out to you ? Ans. Yes. Q. Did he mis behave with you ? Ans. Yes. He had opened my underwear and my private parts had bled. Q. From where had he taken you ? Ans. From near the water pump towards Nala. 30. An attempt by Mr. Mann to assail the evidence of the victim on the ground that she did not make her statement voluntarily and that the possibility of tutoring her cannot be ruled out is not acceptable to us. To our mind, the statement of this child victim is natural, true and voluntary. We do not find any type of adulteration or tutoring in it. 31. Even though during investigation the statement of the victim was not recorded and she was not named as witness in the list of prosecution witness yet it is not disputed that she was brought in the witness box at the instance of the Court and the counsel for the appellant had also cross-examined her. Even if some lacuna is left by the Investigating Agency in not recording the statement of the victim during the investigating after she was able to make the statement, this would not make any difference as proper opportunity was given to the defence side to cross-examine this witness. There cannot be any dispute about the identity of the victim and, therefore, the defence cannot extricate any advantage out of it. The test of caution also points to the irresistible conclusion that there is no motive at all to make a false statement against the appellant. 32. The defence version hangs by a very tenous thread and does not inspire confidence. A father would never expose his daughter to ignominy except when unavoidably necessary. 33. The investigation as conducted in this case also does not suffer from any weakness. We do not find any laxity on any count. 34. 32. The defence version hangs by a very tenous thread and does not inspire confidence. A father would never expose his daughter to ignominy except when unavoidably necessary. 33. The investigation as conducted in this case also does not suffer from any weakness. We do not find any laxity on any count. 34. As a sequel to the aforesaid discussion, the net result which surfaces is that the prosecution has been able to prove that the present appellant had committed rape upon the victim. Consequently the conviction as recorded by the trial Court is hereby upheld. Adverting to the quantum of sentence 35. We stick to the view that inadequate sentence would do more harm to the justice system. It is the duty of the Court to award proper sentence having regard to the nature of the offence and the manner in which it is executed or committed. Imposition of proper punishment is the manner in which the Court responds to the societys cry for justice against the criminal. It is so observed by the Honble Apex Court in Dhananjoy Chatterjee v. State of West Bengal, 1994(1) RCR(Crl.) 429 (SC) : 1994(2) SCC(Crl.) 358. It is further observed in the aforesaid judgment that justice demands that Court should impose punishment befitting the crime so that the courts reflect public abhorrence of the crime. The Court must not keep in view only the rights of the criminal but also the rights of the victim of the crime and the society at large while considering the imposition of appropriate punishment. 36. Similar view has also been expressed by the Honble Apex Court in Ravji v. State of Rajasthan, 1996(2) SCC 175 in which it has been observed that it is the nature and gravity of the crime but not the criminal, which are germane for consideration of appropriate punishment in a criminal trial. The court will be failing in its duty if appropriate punishment is not awarded for a crime which has been committed not only against the individual victim but also against the society to which the criminal and the victim belong. The punishment to be awarded for a crime should conform to and be consistent with the atorcity and brutality with which the crime has been perpetrated. 37. The punishment to be awarded for a crime should conform to and be consistent with the atorcity and brutality with which the crime has been perpetrated. 37. In Puttarajas case (supra) their Lordships have observed that a rapist not only causes physical injuries but also indelibly leaves a scar on the most cherished possession of a woman i.e. her dignity, chastity, honour and reputation. 38. In State of Karnataka v. Krishnappa, 2000(2) RCR(Crl.) 459 (SC) : AIR 2000 SC 1470, the Honble Apex Court observed that sexual violence apart from being a dehumanising act is an unlawful intrusion of the right to privacy and sanctity of a female. It is a serious blow to her supreme honour and offends her self-esteem and dignity. It degrades and humilitates the victim and where the victim is a helpless innocent child, it leaves behind a traumatic experience. The Courts are, therefore, expected to deal with cases of sexual crime against women with utmost sensitivity. Such cases need to be dealt with sternly and severely. 39. In State of Rajasthan v. Om Parkash, 2002(2) RCR(Crl.) 764, where the Honble Apex Court has not shown any sympathy or leniency in reduction of sentence (sic). 40. Resultantly, the present appeal is dismissed on all counts. The appellant is stated to be on bail as his sentence was suspended by this Court. He is not ordered to be taken in to custody to suffer remainder of the sentence.