JUDGMENT : B.P. Ray, J. - This Criminal Appeal is directed against the Judgment and order of conviction passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Balangir in Sessions Case No. 83/13/12 of 1996-97 convicting the Appellant u/s 376 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, I.P.C.) and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to undergo R.I for a further period of six months. 2. The relevant facts from the evidence of the prosecution are that a seven years old girl was sexually assaulted by the Appellant. It is alleged that the victim was a student of Class II in the Saraswati Sisu Mandir, where the accused was a teacher. The accused along with his friend had opened a private coaching center at Malpada, Balangir under the name of 'Dynamic Coaching Centre'. The victim was also a student in the said coaching centre and was attending the coaching classes in the morning hour. The accused used to carry the victim to the coaching centre and was bringing her back to her house after the coaching. On 25.11.1995, Saturday students of Saraswati Sisu Mandir had gone on a picnic, but the victim did not participate in the picnic. At 7 A.M., the accused took the victim to the coaching centre by his cycle and left her near her house at about 9.20 A.M. On arrival at the house, the victim girl started crying and disclosed before her mother (P.W.5) that the accused assaulted sexually on her. The victim girl disclosed before her mother that when she cried due to sexual assault by the accused, the Appellant threatened her to kill and thereafter brought her by his cycle and left her near the house. While the Appellant was bringing her back, he threatened the victim of assault in case she discloses the incident before anybody. The victim further stated to her mother that almost every day the accused used to open her pant and caress her private parts by his fingers. Out of fear of assault by the accused, she was not disclosing the fact earlier. Since the sexual assault on the date of occurrence had pained the victim, she disclosed the facts before her mother and expressed her reluctance to go to the coaching center. Out of fear of assault by the accused, she was not disclosing the fact earlier. Since the sexual assault on the date of occurrence had pained the victim, she disclosed the facts before her mother and expressed her reluctance to go to the coaching center. While the victim was crying, the father of the victim P.W.4-informant got up and ascertained the entire incident from his wife, P.W.5 and became dumb-founded. P.W.4-the father of the victim was reluctant to lodge the F.I.R. as if would affect the future life of the girl. However, he lodged a written report on 28.11.1995 before the LLC, Town P.S., Balangir, who registered a case and took up investigation. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against the accused. As the accused absconded, he could not be medically examined. After filing of the charge sheet, the accused surrendered in Court. 3. The plea of defence is one of complete denial. The further plea is that the father of the victim had given a proposal to the accused relating to the marriage of the accused with one of his relatives. Since, the accused did not agree to the proposal, the father of the victim along with some of his friends assaulted the accused on 25.11.1995 i.e. the date of occurrence and has foisted this false case. 4. In order to prove its case the prosecution has examined as many as eight witnesses in all. P.W.1 is said to be a colleague of the accused at the coaching center who has turned hostile; P.W.2 is a lady doctor, who examined the victim on police requisition; P.W.3 is a witness to the seizure of the wearing apparels of the victim; P.W.4 is the father of the victim and the informant; P.W.5 is the mother of the victim; P.W.6 is the son of the owner of the house where the accused was running the coaching center; P.W.7 is the victim herself and P.W.8 is the investigating officer. The accused has examined one witness in support of his defence. 5. The learned Counsel for the Appellant strenuously contended that since the medical evidence does not corroborate the oral evidence on record, the conviction of the Appellant can not be sustained in the eye of law. In the instant case the evidence of sexual assault on the victim comes from the mouth of the victim herself. 5. The learned Counsel for the Appellant strenuously contended that since the medical evidence does not corroborate the oral evidence on record, the conviction of the Appellant can not be sustained in the eye of law. In the instant case the evidence of sexual assault on the victim comes from the mouth of the victim herself. At the time of occurrence she was seven years old at the time she deposed in the Court, she was eight years. She is, therefore, a child witness. Before recording, her evidence, the learned Sessions Judge has conducted preliminary enquiry by putting some questions to her in order to ascertain her competency. Learned Sessions Judge categorically recorded that she understands all questions and she has given rational answer to him and the learned Sessions Judge was satisfied that she is intelligent enough to understand and depose in the Court as to what happened to her on the date of occurrence. In her evidence she has given a graphic picture of the occurrence that at the time of occurrence, she was student of class II of Saraswati Sisu Mandira and was also going for tuition at private coaching center," at Malpada, Balangir town and that the Appellant was her teacher. She has stated that the occurrence took place on 25.11.1995 on a Saturday and on that day the other students had gone for picnic. She had not participated in the picnic as she was suffering from cold. The accused came to her house and asked her to come to tuition and carried her by his cycle to the coaching center. At the Coaching center the accused taught the victim and other students. After the tuition, when the other students left the coaching center the accused opened her pant and thereafter sexually assaulted her. She felt pain and cried. When she started crying the accused threatened her not to disclose the incident before anybody including her parents or else, he would beat her. Thereafter, accused left the victim at her house where after' she narrated the incident before her mother stating that the accused used to assault her by using his fingers at her private parts. She also disclosed the previous conduct of the accused to her mother while describing the incident on the date of occurrence. Thereafter, accused left the victim at her house where after' she narrated the incident before her mother stating that the accused used to assault her by using his fingers at her private parts. She also disclosed the previous conduct of the accused to her mother while describing the incident on the date of occurrence. She has also stated in her evidence that she had not disclosed the previous conduct of the accused to her mother due to the threatening given by the accused. She has identified the accused, who was in the dock at the time of recording of her deposition by the learned Sessions Judge. During cross examination, she was put to a lengthy cross examination by the learned defence counsel in order to test her veracity, but nothing has been brought in her cross-examination so as to discredit her evidence. According to learned Sessions Judge, her evidence is natural, clear, cogent and coherent. From the demeanour of the victim, learned Sessions Judge has categorically observed that the victim girl is innocent and nothing appeared from her evidence or demeanour that she was giving a tutored version. While deposing in Court, she has addressed the Appellant as 'Amarish Guruji'. Learned Sessions Judge has categorically found that it is unbelievable that a tender girl like P.W.7 would falsely implicate her teacher in the case of this nature, P.W.2, who medically examined the victim girl has found that marks of abrasions were present on the perennial area surrounding the external genitalia. No bruise or laceration was found over external 'genitalia or adjacent part of thigh. No marks of injury were found over labia minora. Hymen was intact. In her cross examination, P.W.2 has stated that the abrasions are possible by the cycling if some rough objects come in contact with the perineal area or even the same is also possible by scratching of nail or by self infliction. She has not given the age of the abrasion. Although the injuries are possible by other means as deposed by P.W.2, in her cross-examination, not a single suggestion to that effect was given to P.W.7 or her parents. Though the age of the injuries has not been given, it can be said for certain that the injuries were caused at the time of occurrence. Penetration is the sine qua non for an offence of rape. Though the age of the injuries has not been given, it can be said for certain that the injuries were caused at the time of occurrence. Penetration is the sine qua non for an offence of rape. However, even if a slightest penetration in the vulva is sufficient to constitute the offence and rupture of hymen is not necessary. Partial penetration within the labia majora of the vulva or pudendum with or without emission of semen or even slightest penetration is sufficient to constitute the offence of rape. Therefore, the presence or absence of injury is not very material where the evidence of the prosecutrix, with regard to the assault is clear and trustworthy. 6. Learned Counsel for the Appellant relying on the evidence of P.W.7-victim girl to the effect that- "Now I can't say exactly whether the accused entered his penis inside my vagina or merely rubbed it over the same" argues that this answer was given by the victim to a question put by the defence. The aforesaid statement of the witness only shows that she was at a loss to state whether the act of the accused would be called as penetration or mere rubbing. This statement of the victim does not imply that the accused has not entered his male organ into her private part. No degree of penetration has been prescribed in law. Even mere entry of a slightest part or even the tip of the penis in the entrance of the vulva would amount to penetration. Since, P.W.7 is very categorical that the accused entered his male organ in her private part, it certainly amount to penetration. It is because of the reason that the victim started crying, the accused could not consummate the full sexual act. Consummation of a full sexual intercourse is not necessary to constitute rape. It has been held by the apex Court in a decision reported in (2006) 33 OCR (SC) 830 that: Sexual violence apart from being a dehumanizing act is an unlawful intrusion on the right of 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 humiliates the victim-and where the victim is a helpless innocent child or a minor, it leaves behind a traumatic experience. It is a serious blow to her supreme honour and offends her self-esteem and dignity - it degrades and humiliates the victim-and where the victim is a helpless innocent child or a minor, it leaves behind a traumatic experience. A rapist not only causes physical injuries but more indelibly leaves a scar on the most cherished possession of a women 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 a crime against the entire society. It destroys, as noted by this Court in Shri Bodhisattwa Gautam Vs. Miss Subhra Chakraborty 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 victim's most cherished of the Fundamental Rights, namely, the Right to Life contained in Article 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (in short the 'Constitution'). 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. A socially sensitized judge, in our opinion, is a better statutory armour in cases of crime against women than long clauses of penal provisions, containing complex exceptions and provisos. xxx xxx It has been further observed by the apex Court that: The offence of rape occurs in Chapter XVI of IPC. It is an offence affecting the human body. In that Chapter, there is a separate heading for "Sexual offences", which encompass Sections 375, 376, 376A, 376B; 376C and 376D IPC "Rape" is defined in Section 375 IPC Sections 375, and 376 IPC have been substantially changed by Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1983 and several new sections were introduced by the new Act i.e. 376A, 376B, 376C and 376D. 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 and against her will'. 'Rape or Raptus' is when a man hath carnal knowledge of a woman by force and against her 'will (Co. Litt. 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 and against her will'. 'Rape or Raptus' is when a man hath carnal knowledge of a woman by force and against her 'will (Co. Litt. 123b); or, as expressed more fully, 'rape is the carnal knowledge of any woman, above the age of particular years, against her Will; or of a woman child, under that age, with or against her will'. (Hale P.C. 628) 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: (1 Hen. 6, la, 9 Edw. 4, 26a (Hale P.C.628). In the crime of rape, 'carnal knowledge' means the penetration to any the slightest degree of the male organ of generation (Stephens Criminal Law, 9th Ed., p.262). In "Encyclopedia of Crime and Justice" (Volume 4, page 1356), it is state "even slight penetration is sufficient and emission is unnecessary". In Halsburys' Statues of England and Wales (Fourth Edition) Volume 12, it is stated that even the slightest degree of penetration is sufficient to prove sexual intercourse. It is violation, with violence, of the private person of a woman, an outrage by all means. By the very nature of the offence it is an obnoxious act of the highest order. 7. The defence plea that the victim's father (P.W.4) has falsely implicated him in this case as he refused to marry'a relative of P.W.4, appears to be concocted. This kind of plea appears to me to be an after-thought and a clever ruse. Even though the Appellant was assaulted on the date of occurrence, as alleged by him, as well as by defence witness (D.W.1), he has not reported the matter at the police station; The fact was that the Appellant absconded some time after taking place of the alleged occurrence. It is difficult to believe that P.W.4, for the sake of the future life of his daughter, and family prestige has falsely implicated the Appellant. Therefore, I am of the view that the attending circumstances, the version of the prosecutrix and the medical evidence amply corroborate the factum of rape. It is difficult to believe that P.W.4, for the sake of the future life of his daughter, and family prestige has falsely implicated the Appellant. Therefore, I am of the view that the attending circumstances, the version of the prosecutrix and the medical evidence amply corroborate the factum of rape. The prime reason for not disclosing such an occurrence before the police or any body else is owing to stigma, which the lady would have carried through out of her life. A girl in India has a trend to conceal such type of offence because it involves her prestige and dignity. In this connection, the apex Court has further observed in the aforesaid case that: 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. An accused cannot cling to a fossil formula 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. 8. Keeping all the aforesaid in mind, I think that this case needs to be approached. Even though the prosecutrix has been thoroughly cross-examined, nothing has been elicited to disbelieve her testimony and being a minor girl of seven years, she had to face the cross examination. Even though there is corroboration in this case, in my considered view, no corroboration is necessary. The version of the prosecutrix is cogent and it inspires the confidence in the mind of the Judge. 9. In that view of the matter, I am not inclined to interfere with the order of sentence awarded by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Balangir. Therefore, the Judgment and order of conviction and the sentence awarded to the Appellant are confirmed. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Final Result : Dismissed