JUDGMENT : 1. This Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 25-6-1998 in S.C. No. 116 of 1996 on the file of Assistant Sessions Judge, Peddapuram, E.G. District, whereby and whereunder the learned Assistant Sessions Judge found accused-Yandamuri Thatharao guilty for the offences under Sections 376, 366-A, 324 and 450 IPC and convicted him accordingly and sentenced him to suffer Rl for eight years and pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default to suffer Rl for six months for the offence under Section 376 IPC; R.I. for five years and fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default to suffer Rl for six months for the offence under Section 366-A IPC, R.I. for two years and fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to suffer Rl for six months for the offence under Section 324 IPC, R.I. for two years and a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to suffer Rl for six months for the offence under Section 450 IPC. 2. The appellant is the sole accused in S.C. No. 116 of 1996. He was put on trial for the offences under Sections 450, 376, 366-A and 324 IPC. The prosecution case, in brief, is: P.W. 2-Yandamuri Nookarathnam is mother, P.W. 8- Bezawada Chinnayyamma is grand mother and P.W. 9- Mogilisetti Alias Yelamanchili Yasoda is maternal aunt's daughter of the victim-P.W. 1. The victim girl, aged about 12 years, is the step sister of the accused. P.W. 3 - Yandamuri Govindu is the brother of the accused. The accused resided in a tiled house which is opposite to the house of P.W. 2 in Sringavaram. P.W. 2, her sons Srinu and P.W. 3, and her daughter-P.W. 1 were residing together. On a day prior to the occurrence P.W. 2 left for Gollaprolu village to see her ailing sister and stayed there and sent P.W. 9 Mogilisetti Alias Yelamanchili Yasoda to the village to inform the same to P.Ws. 1 and 3. On 28-8-1995 at about 8 p.m. the accused went to the house of P.W. 8 and asked her to give him a knife which he kept in the house previously. On the same night P.W. 1 and P.W. 9 slept on one cot and whereas P.W. 8 and Srinu slept on another cot. 1 and 3. On 28-8-1995 at about 8 p.m. the accused went to the house of P.W. 8 and asked her to give him a knife which he kept in the house previously. On the same night P.W. 1 and P.W. 9 slept on one cot and whereas P.W. 8 and Srinu slept on another cot. At about 10 or 11 p.m. the accused armed with a knife entered their house, threatened P.W. 1 and 9 and lifted P.W. 1 forcibly to his house, slapped her on cheeks, made her fall on the ground. Then the accused stripped out of her clothes putting her under fear of threat. When P.W. 1 resisted, the accused beat her with a knife on the middle of forehead. Further resistance of P.W. 1 proved to be futile and the accused accomplished his lust. P.Ws. 8 and 9 and others came there and knocked the door. The accused opened the door and thereupon they found P.W. 1 inside the house and accused pushed P.W. 1 from his house on the pretext that she abused him. P.W. 1 feeling ashamed tried to commit suicide by jumping into a well. P.W. 8 and others prevented her from committing suicide. Thereafter, P.Ws. 1, 8 and 9 went to Gollaprolu and informed the incident to P.W. 2. Then all of them went to Annavaram Police Station where statement of P.W. 1 was reduced into writing, which has been exhibited as Ex. P-1. P.W. 15 Y. Jagdeswara Rao, SI of Police received Ex. P-1 report and registered a case in Crime No. 123 of 1995 under Section 376 IPC and issued Ex. P-16 FIR.P.W. 16 P. Venkateswarlu, Inspector of Police, Annavaram P.S. took up investigation, examined P.Ws. 1, 2, 8 and 9, inspected the scene of offence, prepared observation report and rough sketch of the scene and seized clothes of P.W. 1 (Mos. 2 to 5) in the presence of P.W. 11 and another under the cover of Ex. P-9 report. Ex. P-8 is the scene of offence panchanama. Ex. P-17 is the rough sketch of the scene. The victim was sent for medical examination. Dr. K. Sarada examined the victim and issued Ex. P-12 wound certificate. She collected the vaginal swabs and smears for chemical analysis. Ex. P-13 is the FSL report. Basing on Ex. P-13 FSL report, she gave her final opinion which has been exhibited as Ex. P-17 is the rough sketch of the scene. The victim was sent for medical examination. Dr. K. Sarada examined the victim and issued Ex. P-12 wound certificate. She collected the vaginal swabs and smears for chemical analysis. Ex. P-13 is the FSL report. Basing on Ex. P-13 FSL report, she gave her final opinion which has been exhibited as Ex. P-14. Dr. K.S.N. Prasad examined the victim and determined her age as 13 years. Ex. P-11 is the age certificate issued by him. P.W. 14 medically examined the accused and issued Ex. P-13 certificate opining that the accused is capable of doing sexual intercourse. After completing investigation, a charge sheet came to be submitted before the JFCM, Prattipadu. The learned Magistrate, took the charge sheet on file as P.R.C. No. 55 of 1995 and committed the case to the Sessions Division, E.G. District at Rajahmundry. The learned Sessions Judge took the case on file as S.C. No. 116 of 1996 and made over the same to the Assistant Sessions Judge, Peddapuram. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge, on appearance of the accused and on hearing the prosecution and the accused framed charges under Sections 450, 376, 366-A and 324 IPC, read over and explained the same to the accused, for which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. To bring home the guilt of the accused for the offences with which he stood charged, prosecution examined 16 witnesses and proved 18 documents and exhibited 7 material objects. On behalf of the accused, contradictions in the Sec. 161 Cr.P.C. statements of P.Ws. 1, 2 and 8 have been marked as Exs.D-1 to D-4. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge, considering the evidence brought on record and on hearing the prosecution and the accused, found the accused guilty for the offences under Sections 376, 366-A, 324 and 450 IPC and convicted him accordingly and sentenced him as stated supra. Hence, this Criminal Appeal by the appellant/accused. 3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant/accused and learned Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/accused submits that P.W. 2 foisted the case against the appellant/accused due to property disputes. He further submits that the Doctor, on examination of P.W. 1, found hymen intact which is sufficient to falsify the accusation made against the appellant/accused. Much emphasis has been made on Ex. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/accused submits that P.W. 2 foisted the case against the appellant/accused due to property disputes. He further submits that the Doctor, on examination of P.W. 1, found hymen intact which is sufficient to falsify the accusation made against the appellant/accused. Much emphasis has been made on Ex. P-12 report issued by Dr. K. Sarada. 5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State submits that the evidence of P.W. 1 is fully corroborated by the evidence of her grand mother-P.W. 8 and the medical evidence and thus the conviction and sentence of the appellant/accused for the offences under Sections 376, 366-A, 324 and 450 IPC is legal and proper and the same is not liable to be interfered in this appeal. 6. The offence of rape occurs in Chapter XVI IPC. It is an offence affecting the human body. In that chapter, there is a separate heading for “Sexual offences”, which encompasses Sections 375, 376, 376-A, 376-B, 376-C and 376-D. “Rape” is defined in Section 375 IPC. Sections 375 and 376 IPC have been substantially changed by the Criminal law (Amendment) Act, 1983 and several new sections were introduced by the new Act i.e. Sections 376-A, 376-B, 376-C and 376-D. The fast sweeping changes introduced reflect the legislative intent to curb with iron hand, the offence of rape which affects the dignity of a woman. The offence of rape in its simplest term is “the ravishment of a woman, without her consent, by force, fear or fraud”, or as “the carnal knowledge of a woman by force against her will”. “Rape or raptus” is when a man hath carnal knowledge of a woman by force and against her will, or as expressed more fully, “rape” is the carnal knowledge of any woman, above the age of particular years, against her will. The essential words in an indictment for rape are rapuit and carnaliter cognovit; but carnaliter cognovit, nor any other circumlocution without the word rapuit, are not sufficient in a legal sense to express rape. In the crime of rape, “carnal knowledge” means the penetration to any the slightest degree of the male organ of generation. 7. The physical scar may heal up, but the mental scar will always remain. When a woman is ravished, what is inflicted is not merely physical injury but the deep sense of some deathless shame. 8. In the crime of rape, “carnal knowledge” means the penetration to any the slightest degree of the male organ of generation. 7. The physical scar may heal up, but the mental scar will always remain. When a woman is ravished, what is inflicted is not merely physical injury but the deep sense of some deathless shame. 8. It is now well established that if the Court is satisfied from the evidence of the victim, a conviction can be solely based on such evidence without looking for further corroboration. Same can be done because the prosecutrix is no more treated as an accomplice in the crime. An accused cannot cling to a fossil formulae and insist on corroborative evidence, even if taken as a whole, the case spoken to by the victim strikes a judicial mind as probable. Judicial response to human rights cannot be blunted by legal jugglery. 9. In the Indian setting, refusal to act on the testimony of the victim of sexual assault in the absence of corroboration as a rule, is adding insult to injury. A girl or a woman in the tradition bound non-permissive society of India would be extremely reluctant even to admit that any incident which is likely to reflect on her chastity had ever occurred. She would be conscious of the danger of being ostracized by society and when in the face of these factors the crime is brought to light, there is inbuilt assurance that the charge is genuine rather than fabricated. Just as a witness who has sustained an injury, which is not shown or believed to be self-inflicted, is the best witness in the sense that he is least likely to exculpate the real offender, the evidence of a victim of sexual offence is entitled to great weight, notwithstanding the absence of corroboration. A woman or a girl who is raped is not an accomplice. Corroboration is not the sine qua non for conviction in a rape case. A woman or a girl who is raped is not an accomplice. Corroboration is not the sine qua non for conviction in a rape case. The Apex Court in Rameshwar v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1952 SC 54 observed as follows: “The rule, which according to the cases has hardened into one of law, is not that corroboration is essential before there can be a conviction but that the necessity of corroboration, as a matter of prudence, except where the circumstances make it safe to dispense with it, much be present to the mind of the judge…….” 10. P.W. 1 is the victim. It is the evidence of P.W. 1 that on the night of the incident the accused entered the house, dragged her to his house and ravished her. When she resisted, the accused dealt a blow on her forehead. The fact that the victim sustained injury on her forehead is fully corroborated by the medical evidence. Even the circumstantial evidence of P.W. 8 who rushed to the house of the accused and noticed the victim and the accused together fully corroborates the testimony of the victim. 11. Much argument has been advanced by learned counsel appearing for the appellant/accused that hymen was intact and therefore it falsifies the version of the prosecution that P.W. 1 is the victim of sexual assault. The Doctor who medically examined the victim collected the vaginal swabs and smears and the same have been sent to FSL. On analysis the spermatozoa was found which positively suggest the victim being subjected to sexual assault. He relying on the judgment of this Court in Kolluri Subba Rao v. State, 2004 (2) ALT (Crl.) 424 (A.P.) contends that absence of rupture of hymen is an indication of the victim not being subjected to sexual assault. 12. In the cited case, the Doctor who examined the victim did not find any external injuries inspite of the accused therein had copulation with the victim for about an hour without her consent. It is trite to refer para 12 of the judgment and it is thus: “12. P.W. 9 is the Doctor who examined P.W. 1 on 26-6-1997 at about 10.30 a.m. Ex. P-7 is the final opinion. Ex. P-5 is the wound certificate. It is trite to refer para 12 of the judgment and it is thus: “12. P.W. 9 is the Doctor who examined P.W. 1 on 26-6-1997 at about 10.30 a.m. Ex. P-7 is the final opinion. Ex. P-5 is the wound certificate. Though it is stated that she examined the victim on 26-6-1997 and also it is noted in the wound certificate that she examined P.W. 1 on 26-6-1997, it must have been a mistake on the part of P.W. 9 in not mentioning the correct date on Ex. P-5 and also while testifying in the Court and on that ground it cannot be said that Ex. P-5 is fabricated. On examination by P.W. 9 she did not find any external injuries. On internal examination she found external genetalia healthy. No fresh tears or injuries in internal genetalia were found Hymen was full of white discharge with no tear which means it was intact and she opined that no force was used against P.W. 1 and she did not find any happening of sexual intercourse. She also stated that in case of first sexual intercourse by using force there will be presence of injuries. Therefore, the medical evidence completely ruled out the possibility of rape being committed on P.W. 1 because the hymen was intact. The accused was also examined by P.W. 11 who stated that the accused was capable of performing sexual act. According to P.W. 1, the accused committed copulation for about one hour, and the hymen would not be intact and necessarily further some injuries must have been received. So also no sperm or spermatozoa was found on the skin of P.W. 1 or on the lungi of the accused.” Coming to the facts and circumstances of the case on hand, the Doctor who medically examined the victim found incised wound on her central forehead about 1 inch size red in colour and small abarasions in the middle of upper lip, angle of the mouth left side red in colour. It is the case of the victim that when she resisted, the accused dealt a blow on the middle of her forehead. Her testimony is fully corroborated by the medical evidence. The Doctor who medically examined her collected vaginal swabs and smears and sent them to FSL. The result of analysis indicates the presence of semen and spermatozoa on vaginal swabs and smears vide Ex. Her testimony is fully corroborated by the medical evidence. The Doctor who medically examined her collected vaginal swabs and smears and sent them to FSL. The result of analysis indicates the presence of semen and spermatozoa on vaginal swabs and smears vide Ex. P-13 FSL report. P.W. 8 who is the grand mother of the victim went to the house of the accused on coming to know that the accused took the victim to his house and made the accused open the door and found P.W. 1 in his portion. The evidence of the victim (P.W. 1) is fully corroborated by the medical evidence and the circumstantial evidence. The trial Court has considered the evidence brought on record in right perspective and found the appellant/accused guilty for the offences under Sections 376, 366-A, 324 and 450 IPC. No valid grounds are made to interfere with the conviction of the appellant-accused for the offences under Sections 376, 366-A, 324 and 450 IPC. 13. Considering the age of the appellant/accused and other circumstances of the case, I am of the view that punishment of seven years for the offence under Section 376 IPC would meet the ends of justice. But, for the reduction of sentence of imprisonment imposed on the appellant/accused for the offence under Section 376 IPC from eight to seven years, this appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed.