JUDGMENT Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. (Oral) : This appeal, preferred under Section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as Cr.P.C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 24.01.1995/25.01.1995, passed by IV Additional Sessions Judge, Nainital, in Sessions Trial No. 317 of 1991, whereby accused/appellants Dalbir Singh and Jagir Singh have been convicted under Sections 302 and 376 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred as I.P.C.). Each one of the convicts has been sentenced to imprisonment for life and further directed to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/-, under Section 302 I.P.C., and rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and directed to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/-, under Section 376 I.P.C. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the Lower Court Record. 3. Prosecution story in brief is that on 18.09.1991, P.W.6 Gurdev Singh, a minor boy, had gone in Village Haripura, in the field of one Nand Ram Buxa to cut grass with his younger sister Depo Bai, aged eight years. At 1.00 P.M. (noon), he came back to his house with a bundle of grass leaving his sister in the field. After leaving the grass at home he again went back to the field and found that his sister was not there. On this, he returned back to his house and told his parents that his sister Depo Bai (victim) is missing. On this, P.W.1 Lal Singh, father of the deceased along with P.W.2 Nihal Singh, Gurdev Singh (P.W.6) and some others went towards the fields and made search for Depo Bai. At about 2.30 P.M., the witnesses saw accused/appellants Dalbir Singh and Jagir Singh making attempt to conceal the dead body of Depo Bai in a field. On seeing the witnesses, the two accused/appellants ran away leaving the dead body of Depo Bai in the field. The witnesses saw that the dead body of Depo Bai was naked and it was bleeding from private parts. P.W.1 Lal Singh on the same day lodged First Information Report (Ext. A-1) with Police Station Kala Dungi, at about 5.00 P.M. On the basis of First Information Report (Ext. A-1), the Police registered Crime No. 158 of 1991, relating to offences punishable under Sections 302 and 376 I.P.C. against the accused Viru alias Dalbir Singh and Jagir Singh, and prepared Check Report (Ext. A-14). A-1) with Police Station Kala Dungi, at about 5.00 P.M. On the basis of First Information Report (Ext. A-1), the Police registered Crime No. 158 of 1991, relating to offences punishable under Sections 302 and 376 I.P.C. against the accused Viru alias Dalbir Singh and Jagir Singh, and prepared Check Report (Ext. A-14). Investigation was taken up by P.W.7 Sub Inspector Ram Baran Ram. Police took the dead body in their possession and prepared Inquest Report (Ext. A-3), Sketch of the Dead Body (Ext. A-8), Police Form No. 13 (Ext. A-9), Letter to Medical Officer Incharge (Ext. A-10), requesting for post mortem examination, and Sample Seal (Ext. A-11). P.W.3 Dr. E.U. Siddiqi conducted post mortem examination on the dead body of Depo Bai on 19.09.1991 about 1.00 P.M. He recorded ante mortem injuries and opined that the deceased had died of asphyxia due to ante mortem injury. He also found that labia majora and minora lacerated and hymen ruptured. Meanwhile, the Police took a pair of sleepers from the place of incident and prepared recovery memo (Ext. A-4). Investigation was taken over on 20.09.1991 by P.W.8 Sub-Inspector Ved Prakash. After interrogating the witnesses and completing the investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted Charge Sheet (Ext. A-13) against both the accused Dalbir alias Viru and Jagir Singh for their trial in respect of offences punishable under Sections 302 and 376 I.P.C. 4. The Magistrate, on receipt of the Charge Sheet, after giving necessary copies to the accused, as required under Section 207 of Cr.P.C., appears to have committed the case to the court of Sessions, for trial. Learned IV Additional Sessions Judge, Nainital, to whom the case was transferred, after hearing the parties, framed charge of offences punishable under Sections 376 and 302 I.P.C. on 06.05.1992, against accused Jagir Singh and Dalbir Singh. Both the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. On this, prosecution got examined P.W.1 Lal Singh, complainant and father of the deceased; P.W.2 Nihal Singh, who along with complainant saw accused attempting to conceal the dead body of Depo Bai; P.W.3 Dr. E.U. Siddiqi, who conducted post mortem examination on the dead body of Depo Bai; P.W.4 Constable Sukh Lal, who filed his affidavit that he took the dead body in a sealed condition for post mortem examination; P.W.5 Bhagwan Singh, in whose presence Inquest Report (Ext. E.U. Siddiqi, who conducted post mortem examination on the dead body of Depo Bai; P.W.4 Constable Sukh Lal, who filed his affidavit that he took the dead body in a sealed condition for post mortem examination; P.W.5 Bhagwan Singh, in whose presence Inquest Report (Ext. A-3) was prepared by the Police; P.W.6 Gurdev Singh, minor son of complainant with whom victim Depo Bai had gone to the field, and later at about 2.30 P.M. saw with other witnesses that accused attempting to conceal dead body of the deceased in the field; P.W.7 Sub Inspector Ram Baran Ram, who started the investigation; and P.W.8 Sub Inspector Ved Prakash, who completed the investigation. Oral and documentary evidence was put to both the accused, under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in reply to which they alleged the same to be false. Accused Dalbir Singh and Jagir Singh alleged that they have been falsely implicated due to enmity. However, no evidence in defence was adduced by them. The trial court after hearing the parties found both the accused Dalbir Singh and Jagir Singh guilty of charges of offences punishable under Section 302 and 376 I.P.C. and sentenced each one of them to imprisonment for life and directed to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- (under Section 302 I.P.C.) and rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and further directed to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- (under Section 376 I.P.C.). Aggrieved by said judgment and order dated 24.01.1995/25.01.1995, passed by learned IV Additional Sessions Judge, Nainital, in Sessions Trial No. 317 of 1991, this appeal was filed before Allahabad High Court on 10.02.1995, where it was admitted on 13.02.1995. The appeal is received by this Court under Section 35 of U.P. Recognization Act, 2000 (Central Act 29 of 2000) for its disposal. 5. Before further discussions, we think it just and proper to mention the ante mortem injuries found on the body of the deceased by P.W.3 Dr. E.U. Siddiqi, who prepared Autopsy Report (Ext. A-2) after postmortem examination, on 19.09.1991. The ante mortem injuries mentioned in the Autopsy Report are reproduced as under : (i) Multiple abraded contusions, size 1 cm x .5 cm to 1 cm x 1 cm over anterior aspect of neck at the level of hyoid. Hyoid bone found broken. (ii) Multiple abraded contusion, 1 cm x 1 cm to 2 cm x 1 cm on anterior aspect of thigh and perineum. Hyoid bone found broken. (ii) Multiple abraded contusion, 1 cm x 1 cm to 2 cm x 1 cm on anterior aspect of thigh and perineum. (iii) Multiple abraded contusion 3 cm x 3 cm to 1 cm x 1 cm on both hips and back. (iv) Vaginal tear present, labia majors and minora lacerated, hymen ruptured, blood clot present in vagina. The Medical Officer, at the time of post mortem examination, found trachea and bronchi congested, both lungs congested. The Medical Officer opined that the deceased Depo Bai has died of asphyxia due to ante mortem injury No. 1. From the statement of P.W.3 Dr. E.U. Siddiqi read with Autopsy Report (Ext. A-2), it is clearly established on record that the deceased was subjected to rape and thereafter murdered by strangulating. Now this Court has to see whether the prosecution has proved that accused/appellants Dalbir Singh and Jagir Singh committed rape on the deceased and thereafter committed murdfer. 6. P.W.1 Lal Singh is complainant and father of the deceased. In his statement he has stated that on the day of incident his daughter (Depo Bai) had gone with his son (Gurdev Singh) to cut the grass. He has further stated that his son came back with bundle of grass and left it at home and again went back to the field. The witness has further stated that his son again came to house and told that his sister Depo Bai, who was left by him in the field, was missing. On this, according to P.W.1 Lal Singh he along with Nihal Singh (P.W.2), Kulwant Singh, Laxman Singh and others went in search of Depo Bai. At about 2.30 P.M. in the sugar cane field of one Laxman Buxa, he saw accused/appellants Dalbir Singh and Jagir Singh concealing Depo Bai in mud. This witness has further stated that a third person was also at some distance from the two. However, the three ran away leaving the dead body of Depo Bai. P.W.1 Lal Singh has further stated that he along with above witnesses saw that Depo Bai has already died. She was bleeding from her private parts. After leaving the dead body at the spot he went to Police Station Kala Dungi, and lodged First Information Report (Ext. A-1) with the Police. 7. P.W.1 Lal Singh has further stated that he along with above witnesses saw that Depo Bai has already died. She was bleeding from her private parts. After leaving the dead body at the spot he went to Police Station Kala Dungi, and lodged First Information Report (Ext. A-1) with the Police. 7. Statement of complainant is corroborated by P.W.2 Nihal Singh, who has stated that on the day of incident he had accompanied Lal Singh (P.W.1), Gurdev Singh (P.W.6) and others in searching Depo Bai. The witness has further stated that when they reached in the field of Laxman Singh, they saw accused/appellants Dalbir Singh alias Viru and Jagir Singh covering the dead body of Depo Bai with mud. The witness has further stated that on seeing the witnesses, the accused left the place and ran away. They were chased but could not be caught. 8. Prosecution story is further corroborated by the most important eyewitness P.W.6 Gurdev Singh (minor son of complainant). He has stated that on the day of incident, he had gone with his younger sister (deceased) to cut the grass in the field of Nand Ram. He has further stated that at about 1.00 P.M. (Noon), he returned home to leave the grass collected. After leaving the grass at home he again went back to the place where he had left his sister. However, she was not found there. On this, he again came back to home and told that his sister is missing. On this his father (P.W.1), Nihal Singh (P.W.2), Laxman Singh, Kulwant Singh and others went towards the field of Nand Ram, but Depo Bai was not found there. Thereafter they kept on searching Depo Bai here and there in the fields. At about 2.30 P.M., he along with other witnesses saw that accused/appellants were concealing the dead body of his sister in the field. Lastly, the witness has stated that on seeing the witnesses, accused left the place. When he along with witnesses went to the place where Depo Bai’s body was left, it was found that she had died. She was bleeding from her private parts. 9. The above three witnesses, namely, P.W.1 Lal Singh, P.W.2 Nihal Singh and P.W.6 Gurdev Singh have proved beyond reasonable doubt that in a day light they saw accused/appellants covering dead body of Depo Bai, aged eight years, in the field of Laxman Singh. She was bleeding from her private parts. 9. The above three witnesses, namely, P.W.1 Lal Singh, P.W.2 Nihal Singh and P.W.6 Gurdev Singh have proved beyond reasonable doubt that in a day light they saw accused/appellants covering dead body of Depo Bai, aged eight years, in the field of Laxman Singh. The First Information Report lodged by Lal Singh at 5.00 P.M. with Police Station Kala Dhungi appears to be prompt one as the distance of Police Station from the place of incident, is about 20 kms. Though, the accused/appellants have alleged that they had enmity with the complainant, but the same does not appear to be true as the enmity has been alleged as against one Nand Ram Buxa, regarding whom the complainant has stated that he had no relation with him. The prosecution story narrated by three witnesses is further corroborated by the medical evidence, already discussed above, as such we concur with the findings recorded by the trial court that the prosecution has successfully proved charge of offences punishable under Sections 376 and 302 I.P.C. against the accused/appellants Dalbir Singh and Jagir Singh. 10. On behalf of appellants it is argued that it is not clear whether the accused had first gone to Police Station Bajpur or to Police Station Kala Dungi. It is further submitted that it is not clear whether the place of incident lies within the territorial area of Police Station Kala Dungi or that of Police Station Bajpur as such the entire investigation is suspicious. Having re-examined the evidence on record we do not find any such infirmity in the investigation, which creates any reasonable doubt in the prosecution story. Assuming for a moment that it is not clear that the field of Laxman Singh whether lies in the territorial area of Police Station Bajpur or that of Police Station Kala Dungi, this is not a sufficient ground to upset the findings recorded by the trial court. In this connection we think it just and proper to quote Section 462 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which reads as under : “462. Proceedings in wrong place. In this connection we think it just and proper to quote Section 462 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which reads as under : “462. Proceedings in wrong place. – No finding, sentence or order of any Criminal Court shall be set aside merely on the ground that the inquiry, trial or other proceedings in the course of which it was arrived at or passed, took place in a wrong sessions division, district, sub-division, or other local area, unless it appears that such error has in fact occasioned a failure of justice. There is nothing on record, which shows that the place of incident lies within limits of Police Station Bajpur. Assuming for a moment it is so there had been no failure of justice in the matter. From the statement of the Investigating Officer, examined in the case, it is clear that the incident had occurred within the limits of Police Station Kala Dungi, where the crime was registered and investigated. 11. Next submission advanced on behalf of appellants is that it is hard to believe that accused/appellants would cover the dead body of the deceased in mud exactly at the time when the witnesses reached in the field of Laxman Singh. Having reassessed the evidence on record we do not find anything unnatural in it. As soon after P.W.6 Gurdev Singh took grass from field of Nand Ram leaving his sister (victim) at the spot at 1.00 P.M. and came back from his house and saw that his sister is not there, he immediately reported the matter to his parents and his father along with others (including Gurdev Singh) started making search of the minor girl, whose body was found around 2.30 P.M. being covered in mud by the accused in the field of Laxman Singh. 12. The third contention advanced on behalf of appellants is that the testimony of the three eyewitnesses, namely P.W.1 Lal Singh, P.W.2 Nihal Singh and P.W.6 Gurdev Singh, is not reliable for the reason that all the three are close relatives. We are unable to accept the contention of learned counsel for the appellants for the reason that it is only the close relatives who are more concerned about the victim and there is nothing on the record which suggests that they would falsely implicate the accused/ appellants in case where the minor victim has been raped and murdered. We are unable to accept the contention of learned counsel for the appellants for the reason that it is only the close relatives who are more concerned about the victim and there is nothing on the record which suggests that they would falsely implicate the accused/ appellants in case where the minor victim has been raped and murdered. It is pertinent to mention here that First Information Report is not a delayed one nor there is enmity of the complainant with the accused Dalbir Singh alias Viru or Jagir Singh. 13. Lastly Sri A.S. Gill, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the two appellants were minor at the time when the crime is said to have been committed, as such, they should be given benefit of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. In support of the submission, attention has been drawn to copy of School Leaving Certificate dated 23.05.2009, showing that date of birth of Dalbir Singh is 20.08.1976. This document has been obtained in May 2009 i.e. few days before the date of arguments in this appeal, while the school is said to have been left way back on 11.07.1984. The document appears to have been filed only to paint the arguments that the accused were minor on the day of commission of crime. From the trial court’s record it appears that the accused/ appellants have nowhere taken the plea that they were less than sixteen years of age on the day of incident. When the crime in question was committed, trial relating to juveniles were governed by Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 (53 of 1986) till the conclusion of trial said Act was in force. Provisions of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, came into force only in the year 2001, while the conviction had already been recorded by the trial court in the year 1995. Apart from this, learned A.G.A. pointed out that as per the entry in the General Diary made at the time of arrest of the accused Dalbir Singh his age has been shown to be 21 years. In these circumstances, we are unable to interfere with the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court on the above ground. 14. For the reasons as discussed above, this appeal is liable to be dismissed. The appeal is dismissed. In these circumstances, we are unable to interfere with the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court on the above ground. 14. For the reasons as discussed above, this appeal is liable to be dismissed. The appeal is dismissed. The impugned judgment and order dated 24.01.1995/25.01.1995, passed by IV Additional Sessions Judge, Nainital, in Sessions Trial No. 317 of 1991, is affirmed. The conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court against the accused/appellants Dalbir Singh and Jagir Singh also stand affirmed. The accused/appellants are on bail. Their bail is cancelled. Lower Court Record be sent back to the trial court to make the accused/appellants Dalbir Singh and Jagir Singh serve out the sentences awarded against them by the trial court.