Judgment S.N.Aggarwal, J. 1. This judgment will dispose of Criminal Appeal No. 323-SB of 1989 filed by Jaskaran Singh accused/appellant and Criminal Revision No. 851-SB of 1989 filed by the complainant for enhancement of sentence. Both these proceedings arise out of the same judgment dated 2.8.1989. 2. According to the prosecution case, prosecutrix Jasbir Kaur (fictitious name) daughter of Harbans Singh was aged about 12 years. On 22.7.1988, at about 3.30 PM, she was returning from the shop of Chan after purchasing world map from the said shop. When she reached opposite to the house of Jaskaran Singh accused, she was forcibly taken inside his house by the accused. She was subjected to forcible sexual intercourse by him without her consent. The prosecutrix cried for help but none responded. After some time somebody knocked at the door of the house of the accused. On hearing the knock, the accused climbed on the roof through the stairs and ran away. The prosecutrix opened the door after the accused had run away and found her fathers brother Swaran Singh. The prosecutrix narrated the entire incident to her uncle. The prosecutrix and her uncle were proceeding towards their house when the mother of the prosecutrix met them on the way. After reaching the house, mother and uncle of prosecutrix went to the house of Sarpanch and they returned after about one hour. Thereafter, the prosecutrix, her mother and her uncle were proceeding towards the Police Station when the police officials met them on the canal bank. The statement of prosecutrix was recorded and the present case was registered. 3. The prosecutrix was got medically examined from the lady doctor of Civil Hospital, Jalandhar and on the next day, she was got subjected to X-ray examination to determine her age. The accused was arrested. The investigation was completed and the accused was sent up for trial. 4. After the challan was presented in the learned trial Court, charge under Section 376 IPC was framed against the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 5. In support of its case, the prosecution examined Jasbir Kaur, prosecutrix as PW-1, her uncle Swaran Singh as PW-2. Dina Singh, Teacher of Saint Antony Convent School, Adampur as PW-3, Harbans Singh (father of prosecutrix) as PW- 4, ASI Gian Singh as PW-5, Dalip Singh Draftsman as PW-6, Dr. 5. In support of its case, the prosecution examined Jasbir Kaur, prosecutrix as PW-1, her uncle Swaran Singh as PW-2. Dina Singh, Teacher of Saint Antony Convent School, Adampur as PW-3, Harbans Singh (father of prosecutrix) as PW- 4, ASI Gian Singh as PW-5, Dalip Singh Draftsman as PW-6, Dr. Ajaib Singh, Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre as PW-7 who has conducted medical examination of the accused and had found him fit for sexual intercourse, Dr. Jaspal Singh, Radiologist as PW-8 and Dr. Nagin Dhaliwal as PW-9. 6. The accused/appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in which he claimed to be innocent and pleaded false implication at the instance of persons who had committed the murder of his father as they were related to the father of the prosecutrix. 7. In defence, the accused examined Dari Chowkidar as DW-1. 8. On the basis of this evidence, the learned trial Court came to the conclusion that the prosecution has succeeded to prove the charge against the accused/appellant and he was accordingly convicted by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar vide judgment dated 2.8.1989. Keeping in view the gravity of the offence, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000/-. In default of payment of fine, he was to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months. 9. Hence, this Criminal Appeal No. 323-SB of 1989. Criminal Revision No. 851- SB of 1989 was also filed by the prosecutrix for enhancement of sentence. 10. I have gone through the record of the case and have considered the submissions made before me by Shri G.S. Sawhney for Mr. P.S. Bhullar and Mr. Anmol Rattan Sidhu, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. 11. So far as the age of prosecutrix is concerned while appearing as PW-1, she was given her age as 12 years. Dina Singh was a Teacher in Saint Antony Convent School, Adampur. He brought the admission register maintained by the said school. He also proved that Jasbir Kaur prosecutrix was a student in his school where she was admitted on 11.12.1979. Dina Singh was a Teacher in Saint Antony Convent School, Adampur. He brought the admission register maintained by the said school. He also proved that Jasbir Kaur prosecutrix was a student in his school where she was admitted on 11.12.1979. He also deposed that as per school record, the date of birth of prosecutrix was 15.7.1976 and proved photo copy of admission form Exhibit PE (her date of birth as per school was 15.7.1976) and she was student of 6th class in Saint Antony Convent School, Adampur. 12. Father of prosecutrix, namely Harbans Singh, has appeared as PW-4. He also deposed on oath that the date of birth of his daughter was 15.7.1976. He also deposed that she was a student of Saint Antony Convent School, Adampur where she was got admitted in the Nursery class on 11.12.1979 and he identified his signatures in the admission form photo copy of which was Exhibit PE. PW-8 Dr. Jaspal Singh had medically examined the prosecutrix for the purposes of determining her age and he deposed that the age of prosecutrix could be 14-1/2 to 15-1/2 years. 13. Since the date of birth of prosecutrix has been proved as per school record as 15.7.1976, therefore, it is proved beyond doubt that the prosecutrix was about 12 years on the date of occurrence. 14. So far as the commission of sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix is concerned, it has been proved by the prosecutrix herself while appearing as PW-1. She is corroborated by her uncle Swaran Singh who had appeared as PW-2. He had proved that on 22.7.1988 at about 3.45 PM, he was going from his house to the house of Harbans Singh and on the way he heard cries of his niece Jasbir Kaur (prosecutrix) coming from the house of Jaskaran Singh accused. Then he entered the said house and knocked at the door. Thereafter, the accused had slipped out of the house by climbing the stairs and Jasbir Kaur had opened the door. She had narrated the whole occurrence to him. 15. The prosecutrix was also medically examined by Dr. Nagin Dhaliwal PW-9 on 23.7.1988 at about 11.00 AM. She observed as under :- "Bruises 2 in number on the lateral side of neck on the right side measuring 1 x 2 cm and 1 x 1 cm. On examination of the genitals, blood stained pubic hair around the labia majora. 15. The prosecutrix was also medically examined by Dr. Nagin Dhaliwal PW-9 on 23.7.1988 at about 11.00 AM. She observed as under :- "Bruises 2 in number on the lateral side of neck on the right side measuring 1 x 2 cm and 1 x 1 cm. On examination of the genitals, blood stained pubic hair around the labia majora. 2) Bleeding from the vaginal canal plus. 3) Hymen torn, Margins irregular, lacerated red, swollen and painful. 4) Periurethral tear 1/2 cm. on the right lateral side on touch and painful." 16. Dr. Nagin Dhaliwal also proved that Harbans Singh, father of the prosecutrix who had been accompanying her had also produced shirt, Salwar and underwear of the prosecutrix which were blood stained and torn. These clothes and two vaginal slides in sealed parcel were sent to the Chemical Laboratory for chemical examination. She also opined that rape on the prosecutrix had taken place about 24 hours earlier. 17. The report of Chemical Examiner was also received. It was proved as Exhibit PM and as per this report semen was found on the vaginal slides which clearly proves that prosecutrix was subjected to sexual intercourse. 18. So far as involvement of the accused/appellant is concerned, he was been specifically named by the prosecutrix as the offender who had dragged her inside his house while she was passing in the street. She has also deposed that after taking her inside, the accused had committed forcible sexual intercourse with her without her consent. She had also cried for help but the accused had threatened her with a knife. She is further corroborated by Swaran Singh, PW-2 who had heard the cries of the prosecutrix coming from the house of the accused. He further deposed that he knocked at the door of the house but the accused had slipped by climbing stairs. When the door was opened by Jasbir Kaur, prosecutrix, she was found by him crying. She had narrated the whole occurrence to him. 19. Their Lordships of the Honble Supreme Court observed in the judgment reported as Kamal Kishore etc. He further deposed that he knocked at the door of the house but the accused had slipped by climbing stairs. When the door was opened by Jasbir Kaur, prosecutrix, she was found by him crying. She had narrated the whole occurrence to him. 19. Their Lordships of the Honble Supreme Court observed in the judgment reported as Kamal Kishore etc. v. State of Himachal Pradesh, 2000(2) RCR(Crl.) 679 (SC) : AIR 2000 Supreme Court 1820, that where the prosecutrix unmistakably points towards the accused as a person who ravished her and her version is corroborated by the other testimony then it is conclusively established that she was subjected to ravishment by the accused and by none else. 20. Otherwise also in a case of single accused, the theory of false implication does not appear to be probable at all. Regarding evidentiary value of the statement of the prosecutrix, law is settled that she is neither an accomplice nor any corroboration is required. Reference may be made to the judgment of the Honble Supreme Court reported as State of Rajasthan v. N.K., 2000(2) RCR(Crl.) 471 (SC) : AIR 2000 Supreme Court 1812. Even in State of Punjab v. Ramdev Singh, 2004(1) RCR(Crl.) 345 (SC) : 2004(2) Apex Criminal 214 : AIR 2004 Supreme Court 1290, their Lordships of the Honble Supreme Court reiterated the same view of law. 21. The accused was medically examined by Dr. Ajaib Singh, PW-7 on 25.7.1988 at about 4 P.M. and he had found him fit to perform the act of sexual intercourse. The accused had taken the plea that his father Sansar Singh was murdered for which Sampuran Singh, Kulvinder Singh and Davinder Singh were prosecuted and convicted. Those persons were relatives of the father of the prosecutrix and, therefore, he has been falsely implicated in this case. 22. As discussed above, it has been successfully proved by the prosecution that the prosecutrix was subjected to forcible sexual intercourse. This version of the prosecution is supported not only by oral evidence but also by the medical evidence. Therefore, it is not a case where false allegations of rape have been made whereas it was accused who had committed rape on the prosecutrix. 23. Keeping in view the discussion held above, I find that it was the accused alone who had committed the offence of rape on the prosecutrix. 24. Therefore, it is not a case where false allegations of rape have been made whereas it was accused who had committed rape on the prosecutrix. 23. Keeping in view the discussion held above, I find that it was the accused alone who had committed the offence of rape on the prosecutrix. 24. The offence of rape is very serious. It spoils the whole psychology of the victim particularly when the victim happens to be a girl child. The Honble Supreme Court was pleased to observe in the judgment reported as State of Karnataka v. Krishnappa, 2000(2) RCR(Crl.) 459 (SC) : AIR 2000 Supreme Court 1470 (SC). as under :- "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 traumtic experience. The Courts are, therefore, expected to deal with cases of sexual crime against women with utmost sensitivity." 25. In recent days also, a number of judgments have come down from the Honble Supreme Court in which their Lordships emphasised the need to deal with such cases with more care and caution and with a humane approach. Reference may be made to the latest judgment of the Honble Supreme Court in State of Punjab v. Ramdev Singh, AIR 2004 Supreme Court 1290, in which their Lordships repeated the same principles of law and were further pleased to observe as under :- ".......... a rapist not only causes physical injuries but more indelibly leaves a scar on the most cherished possession of a woman i.e. her dignity, honour, reputation and not the least her chastity. Rape is not only a crime against the person of a woman, it is crime against the entire society. It destroys, as noted by this Court in Shri Bodhisattwa Gautam v. Miss Subhra Chakraborty 1996(3) RCR(Criminal) 786 : (AIR 1996 SC 922), the entire psychology of a woman and pushes her into deep emotional crisis. 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, 1950." 26. 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, 1950." 26. Accordingly, the conviction of the accused/appellant under section 376 I.P.C. is up-held. 27. There is no merit in the present appeal and the same is dismissed. 28. The learned trial Court has sentenced the accused/appellant to rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to the fine amount of Rs. 3,000/-. In default of payment of fine, he is to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Therefore, the sentence awarded to the accused/appellant is adequate and does not call for any enhancement. Hence this Criminal Revision file by the prosecutrix for enhancement of sentence is also dismissed. 29. The accused/appellant is stated to be on bail. Necessary steps be taken immediately for the arrest of accused/appellant to undergo remaining part of sentence.