JUDGMENT Hon’ble Vinod Prasad, J.—The sole appellant Natho Ram @ Nathoo has come to this Court challenging his conviction under Section 376 I.P.C. and implanted sentence of five years RI recorded by Session’s Judge, Kanpur Dehat (earlier Non-Metropolitan Area) vide impugned judgment and order dated 31.3.1982 recorded in S.T. No. 470 of 1981, State v. Natho Ram. 2. In short, prosecution allegation against the appellant is that on 29.5.1981 at 6.00 P.M. he had outraged the chastity of a young damsel aged about 12 years namely Km. Kesar P.W. 2, daughter of informant Sone Lal P.W. 1, near a pond situated in village Taranpur, P.S. Bhognipur, district Kanpur Dehat. 3. Medical examination of the victim Km. Kesar was conducted by Dr. Smt. Lata Mehrotra P.W. 4, who had prepared her medical examination report Ext. Ka-2 and supplementary report. Attire of the victim has been proved by her as material Ext. 1. X-ray of the victim was conducted by Dr. H.C. Prasad P.W. 5, who has proved the X-ray plate Ext. Ka-3 and its report Ext. Ka-4. According to the doctor, victim was 12 years of age. 4. Crime was registered by constable moharir Ram Pal on 23.5.1981 at 3.05 P.M. vide Ext. Ka-5. GD entry of registration of crime is Ext. Ka-6. Initial investigation into the crime was conducted by SI R.K. Pandey, who copied the GD entry, chik FIR and recorded 161 Cr.P.C. statement of the mother of the victim. P.W. 6 also prepared site plan Ext. Ka-7 and had also conducted 82-83 Cr.P.C. proceedings against the appellant vide Ext. Ka-8 to Ka-12 and subsequently concluding the investigation had charge-sheeted the appellant vide Ext. Ka-14. Finding case of the appellant triable by session’s Court, it was committed to the Court of session’s by the Magistrate. 5. Session’s Judge, Non-Metropolitan Area, Kanpur charged the appellant with offence under Section 376 I.P.C. on 26.2.1982, which charge was denied by the appellant, who claimed to be tried. 6. Prosecution examined informant P.W. 1 Sone Lal, victim Km. Kesar P.W. 2 and Munti Lal P.W. 3 as the fact witnesses to establish its case beyond any shadow of doubt. Formal witnesses included Dr. Smt. Lata Mehrotra P.W. 4, Dr. H.C. Prasad P.W. 5 and second I.O. SI D.S. Dixit P.W. 6. 7. 6. Prosecution examined informant P.W. 1 Sone Lal, victim Km. Kesar P.W. 2 and Munti Lal P.W. 3 as the fact witnesses to establish its case beyond any shadow of doubt. Formal witnesses included Dr. Smt. Lata Mehrotra P.W. 4, Dr. H.C. Prasad P.W. 5 and second I.O. SI D.S. Dixit P.W. 6. 7. Session’s Judge after marshaling the evidences critically appreciating facts and circumstances of the case, concluded that prosecution has successfully anointed appellant’s guilt to the hilt and, therefore, convicted him for the charge of rape and sentenced him to five years RI, which conviction and sentence is under challenge in the instant appeal. 8. I have heard Sri S.K. Pal, learned counsel in support of this appeal and Sri Raghuraj Kishore, learned AGA for the respondent-State. Sri Pal criticizing the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence contended that prosecution witnesses are not reliable, testimony of the victim too does not inspire any confidence as she is unable to disclose those very facts which she ought to have known. He further submitted that because of political rivalry and election of village pradhan, a false case was cooked up against the appellant, who was a truck driver. It is further submitted that the brother of the appellant was a candidate in village pradhan election and, therefore, the rival side got him implicated. Learned counsel next submitted that the testimony of the victim is not reliable. He at last submitted that the incident had occurred many decades ago and, therefore, the sentence imposed on the appellant be reduced suitably looking to his age, which as of now will be round about 65 years. 9. Learned AGA to the contrary submitted that in this case, charge of rape is proved beyond doubt. Medical report by the two doctors P.W. 4 Dr. Smt. Lata Mehrotra and P.W. 5 Dr. H.C. Prasad unerringly indicate that victim was subjected to rape and that time she was a damsel aged about 12 years and hence a minor. He further submitted that there was no reason for the victim P.W. 2 Km. Kesar to depose falsely against the appellant and it is absurd to suggest that a father because of some political rivalry will get the appellant implicated leveling a charge of rape upon her unmarried adolescent minor daughter. He further submitted that there was no reason for the victim P.W. 2 Km. Kesar to depose falsely against the appellant and it is absurd to suggest that a father because of some political rivalry will get the appellant implicated leveling a charge of rape upon her unmarried adolescent minor daughter. He further submitted that the investigation is above board and inspires confidence and, therefore, there is nothing on the record to take a contrary view than what has been taken by the Session’s Judge, Kanpur Dehat and, therefore, appeal sans merits and be dismissed. 10. I have considered the arguments raised by both the sides and have perused the materials and evidences on record. Admittedly, victim was 12 years of age at the time of the incident. This allegation, as was levelled by the father in his FIR, that victim prior to outraging her modesty was administered alcohol is proved from medical report. Doctor has also lend credence to the prosecution version of victim being a minor and subjected to rape. Medical and X-ray reports of the victim are reproduced herein under to cement the said facts : “Examined Km. Kesar D/o Sonelal chamar R/o Taranpur P/S Bhognipur District Kanpur, brought and identified by constable C.P. 2336 Lal Singh thana Bhognipur, at A.H.N. and Dufferin Hospital Kanpur on 30.5.1981 at 4.30 P.M. M.I. (1) One (eLlk) on the right side of neck 2" above the clavicle and 1" to the right of middline. (2) Thumb impression. O/E Height 51" Wt. 23 Kg. Teeth 6/6 ———— 6/5 O/E Small scratch about ½ cm. In size at left. 3rd rib level on the back. Superficial bruise is present on the right of midline at T-12 L1 level 1 ½ cm X ¼ cm. In size Breast not developed. Axillary and Public hair not present. Local Examination— On the left labia (inner side) there is a abrasion about ¾ cm x ¼ cm in size. On the inner side of Rt. Lebia. The area is raw. Hymen is torn between 6-8 O’ clock position. No fresh bleeding at present. Vagina admits 1 finger. There is pain on separating the labia. Vaginal Smear—No sperms seen. The duration of injury is around (hours than) 24 hours. Cloths- She was wearing a white paijama () which had few blood stains. The pajama was torn at a number of places. Hymen is torn between 6-8 O’ clock position. No fresh bleeding at present. Vagina admits 1 finger. There is pain on separating the labia. Vaginal Smear—No sperms seen. The duration of injury is around (hours than) 24 hours. Cloths- She was wearing a white paijama () which had few blood stains. The pajama was torn at a number of places. It has been sealed and handed over to the police man. Opinion on the basis of above examination it can be said that rape has been committed. Regarding her age she is being sent to UHH hospital for X-ray and supplementary report will be given on receiving the X-ray report.” “X-ray report of Km. Kesar Km. Kesar D/o Sone Lal So 376,77,78 X-ray Rt. Wrist, elbow knee 1/6/81 (1) X-ray Rt. Wrist;- a efiphyes around the right wrist have not fused. Perform just appearing. (2) X-ray Rt. - elbow- a efiphyes around the right- an elbow have not fused. Bone age - about 12 years. 1/6/81" 11. Further during trial when victim was testifying, she did narrate in her examination-in-chief entire incident occurred with her. Trial Judge was conscious enough and, therefore, to judge the I.Q. (intelligent qutinent), he had questioned the victim and she was found quite intelligent and capable of understanding. Victim recollecting the episode, a temerity implanted on her by the appellant, even went in tears at the time of deposing before the Court. She was tested vigorously by the defence counsel but she stood the test of her cross-examination with steadfastness. She deposed that she had gone alongwith her father to lodge the report and because she could not walk on foot after some distance, she was even carried on the shoulder by her father. She further testified that her father had got no agriculture land and is a poor laborer. Victim further testified and acknowledged material Ext. 1, which was her attire and was torned off by the appellant at the time of commission of the offence. Regarding rape, she made categorical deposition that it was the appellant, who had robbed her of her most precious honour as a rapist. She was suggested that she did not known the accused appellant prior to the incident and she had deposed falsely to which suggestions, she has flatly denied. Regarding rape, she made categorical deposition that it was the appellant, who had robbed her of her most precious honour as a rapist. She was suggested that she did not known the accused appellant prior to the incident and she had deposed falsely to which suggestions, she has flatly denied. On the record, there are credible evidences that the victim was a resident of same locality of the same village and, therefore, her acquaintance with the appellant cannot be doubted. In her depositions, victim had stated that prior to raping her, appellant had allured her by offering his services in collecting of the unriped mango fruits. 12. After looking into the entire facts and circumstances of the appeal, I do not find any error either in critical appreciation of facts or that of the law by the trial Judge. Site plan also supports the prosecution version. In the end, I do not find any merit in this appeal, which stands dismissed. Conviction and sentence of the appellant stands confirmed. Appellant is on bail, he is directed to surrender forthwith to serve out remaining part of his sentence for which, C.J.M., Kanpur Dehat is directed to issue warrant of arrest, get appellant arrested and lodged him in jail. Let a copy of the judgment be certified to trial Judge, Kanpur Dehat for its intimation and follow up action. —————