JUDGMENT Heard respective learned counsel for the parties. 2. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and order, dated 4.11.2011, rendered by the learned Special Judge, Osmanabad, in Special Case (Atro.) No. 1 of 2011, thereby convicting the appellant (original accused) [hereinafter referred to as per original status 'the accused'], for the offence punishable under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer R.I. for 3 years and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to suffer S.I. for one month; and also convicting him for the offence punishable under Section 3(1) (xii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and sentencing him to suffer R.I. for six months and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to suffer S.I. for one month; and also convicting him for the offence punishable under Section 376 (f) of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer R.I. for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default to suffer S.I. for six months; and also convicting him for the offence punishable under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer S.I. for 10 days and to pay fine of Rs.100/-, in default to suffer S.I. for one day, and directing that after deposit of the fine amount, same be given to the victim under Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 3. The factual matrix, which gave rise to the present appeal is as follows :- (a) The incident in question took place between the intervening night of 13.9.2010 and 14.9.2010 at the wee hours at about 1.00 a.m. The victim, aged about 6 years is the daughter of complainant namely Bapu Rama Pawar, who is Pardhi by caste and resides with his family in Gandhi Nagar at Kallam. (b) It is alleged that on 13.9.2010 the complainant returned home situated near platform of weekly bazar at Kallam after the labour work and had dinner with the family members and went to see his mother who was sick at Astha hospital. After returning he slept along with family members. However, at wee hours on 14.9.2010 his daughter started crying. Hence, he asked her whether she was required to go to latrine. He noticed that she was standing in naked condition, and therefore, he was surprised. Hence, he made inquiry with her. After returning he slept along with family members. However, at wee hours on 14.9.2010 his daughter started crying. Hence, he asked her whether she was required to go to latrine. He noticed that she was standing in naked condition, and therefore, he was surprised. Hence, he made inquiry with her. Thereupon she disclosed in Pardhi language that one person, who wanders at market road, having injury mark on his forehead, lifted her by pressing her mouth and taken her towards Veterinary hospital and made her to lie on the ground and when she shouted, he gave slaps and fist blows to her and said person pressed her mouth and thereafter inserted his penis into her vagina. Thereupon she started shouting, but again the said person slapped her and ran away. The complainant again made inquiry with her, but she repeated her earlier version in Pardhi language. (c) Hence, the complainant took the victim towards Veterinary hospital and found that one person wearing half shirt was standing besides the road and she raised her finger towards him. However, after noticing the complainant and the victim, he ran away. The complainant noticed one small injury mark on the forehead of the said person. The complainant asked the victim whether she identified the said person. Thereupon she replied in affirmative in Pardhi language. Thereafter the complainant and the victim went to Veterinary hospital and the victim showed the spot of the incident and her clothes were lying there. The victim further disclosed that the person who ran away resides in the town and started weeping. (d) It is the case of the prosecution that thereafter the complainant took the victim to Rural hospital, Kallam for medical treatment, since there was bleeding from her vagina. PW2 Dr. Manju Shelke, who was attached to the Rural hospital, Kallam as Medical Officer, examined the victim and issued the medical certificate (Exh. 17), and she referred the said patient to higher center for management of third degree tear. Thereafter the complainant approached the Kallam police station and lodged the complaint (Exh.15), which was recorded by PW 11 Bajirao Bale. Accordingly, crime was registered against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 376 (f), 363, 323 of the Indian Penal Code under C.R. No. 116 of 2010. Thereafter the complainant approached the Kallam police station and lodged the complaint (Exh.15), which was recorded by PW 11 Bajirao Bale. Accordingly, crime was registered against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 376 (f), 363, 323 of the Indian Penal Code under C.R. No. 116 of 2010. (e) PW13 P.I. Surwase who was attached to Kallam police station took over the further investigation and went to the spot of incident and prepared the spot panchanama in presence of panch as (Exh.32) and seized one chock let colour nicker of small girl having blood stains, blood stained soil, one frock of small girl having blood stains bearing mark 40. He recorded the statements of witnesses. He also arrested the accused under arrest panchanama which was prepared in presence of panch as (Exh.49). He also seized the clothes of the accused, which were worn by him on the date of incident i.e. T-shirt of white colour having label of 'Jai Bhavani Navratra Mahotsav' thereon bearing blood stains thereon and also scribe' Adsulwadi' thereon. He also seized one faint blue colour Jean pant having blackish blood stains thereon, and found one red colour thread, and having some black bids to that thread and one plastic some fixed to that thread in the pocket of pant of accused, under seizure panchanama (Exh.34). (f) During investigation, it was revealed that the accused belongs to Brahmin community, and therefore, with the permission of concerned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, offence was added against the accused under the provisions of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Accordingly, PW14 Dy. S.P. Punjabrao Bhagat took over the investigation and PW13 P.I. Surwase arrested the accused. PW 13 P.I. Surwase issued letter to the Tahsildar, Kallam and got prepared the map of spot of the incident (Exh. 51) and also obtained caste certificate of the accused from Nagar Parishad by issuing letter (Exh.51), as well as issued letter (Exh.52) to the School of the accused and obtained his transfer certificate (Exh.53). He also obtained caste and residential certificate of the accused from police patil, Kallam (Exh.45). Moreover, he also sent letter to PW5 Gunderam Rathod i.e. Tahsildar, Kallam to conduct test identification parade of the accused. He also obtained caste and residential certificate of the accused from police patil, Kallam (Exh.45). Moreover, he also sent letter to PW5 Gunderam Rathod i.e. Tahsildar, Kallam to conduct test identification parade of the accused. Accordingly PW5 Rathod conducted the test identification parade of the accused, wherein the accused was identified by the identifying witnesses including the victim and he submitted parade memorandum to that effect (Exh.28). Thereafter PWI4 Dy. S.P. Bhagat sent the seized articles for the Chemical Analyser's office at Aurangabad for examination purpose along with the forwarding letter (Exh.3 7), and the chemical analysis reports thereof which were received were produced at Exhs. 56, 57 and 58, respectively. 4. Accordingly, after completion of investigation, PW14 Dy. S.P. Bhagat filed the charge sheet against the accused on 9.12.2010 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kallam. However, since the offence with which the accused was charged was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Osmanabad. Accordingly, learned Special Judge, Osmanabad framed the charge against the accused on 20.1.2011 (Exh4) for the offences punishable under Sections 363 of the Indian Penal Code; 3(1)(xii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act; and also under Sections 376 (f) and 323 of the Indian Penal Code. However, the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 5. To substantiate the charges levelled against the accused, the prosecution has examined as many as 14 witnesses, as mentioned below :- PW 1 Bapu Rama Pawar i.e. father of victim girl complainant. PW 2 Dr. Manju Udhavrao Shelke, Medical Officer, Primary Health Center, Kallam, who examined the victim girl initially, and issued medical certificate at Exh.17. PW 3 Dr. Satyaprem Marutirao Ware, Medical Officer, Primary Health Center, Kallam who examined the accused and issued medical certificate at Exh. 19. PW 4 Dr. Minakshi Maruti Surve, Medical Officer, who examined the victim and gave her treatment and issued medical certificate at Exh.2]. PW 5 Gunderam Biraji Rathod, Tahsildar, Kallam, who conducted the test identification parade and produced the parade memorandumat Exh.28. PW 6 Manohar Dadarao Thorat, panch to the test identification parade memorandum. PW 7 Archana Vijay Pataskar, panch to spot panchanama. PW 8 Chandrashekhar Manoj Trivedi, panch to arrest panchanama of the accused. PW 5 Gunderam Biraji Rathod, Tahsildar, Kallam, who conducted the test identification parade and produced the parade memorandumat Exh.28. PW 6 Manohar Dadarao Thorat, panch to the test identification parade memorandum. PW 7 Archana Vijay Pataskar, panch to spot panchanama. PW 8 Chandrashekhar Manoj Trivedi, panch to arrest panchanama of the accused. PW 9 Chhaya Sadashiv Ronge, who took the entry of added Section under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in the C.R. PW 10 Navnath Govindrao Kamble, carrier. PW 11 Bajirao Manmath Bale, who recorded the complaint of the complainant Exh.15. PW 12 Rameshwar Parshuram Ghule, who registered the crime under C.R. No. 116 of 2010 at Kallam police station. PW 13 P.I. Mallikarjtin Dharmanna Survase, the first Investigating Officer. PW 14 Dy. S.P. Punjabrao Arjunrao Bhagat, second Investigating Officer. 6. The defence of the accused is of total denial and he stated that he was serving in a grocery shop at Kallam and Lalabai Pawar i.e. wife of the complainant requested him to provide grocery items on credit, to which he declined and thereupon she abused him and gave threats to him that she would see after him and thereafter police personnel arrived at his residence and took him into custody. Accordingly, he submitted that he has been implicated in this case falsely, and therefore, claimed to be innocent. However, the accused neither examined himself on oath nor examined any defence witness in support of his defence. 7. After considering the oral as well as documentary evidence adduced/ produced by the prosecution on record, the learned trial court convicted the and sentenced the accused as mentioned herein above. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the said conviction and sentences, the accused/appellant has preferred the present appeal assailing the same and prayed for quashment thereof, and consequently, and for his acquittal for the offences with which he was charged. 8. Shri R.D. Sanap, advocate (appointed) for the appellant/accused submitted that the prosecution case totally rests upon circumstantial evidence and there is no direct evidence to the occurrence of the incident. In fact, although prosecution has examined 14 witnesses to substantiate the charges levelled against the appel1ant, only 8 witnesses are material out of the said witnesses. 8. Shri R.D. Sanap, advocate (appointed) for the appellant/accused submitted that the prosecution case totally rests upon circumstantial evidence and there is no direct evidence to the occurrence of the incident. In fact, although prosecution has examined 14 witnesses to substantiate the charges levelled against the appel1ant, only 8 witnesses are material out of the said witnesses. He submitted that the accused has been implicated in this case falsely due to enmity between the complainant, namely, Bapu Pawar, who is father of the victim girl and wife of the accused. In fact, prosecution has failed to examine the star witness i.e. victim girl although she was more than 5 years old. He also submitted that although as per allegations, the incident occurred at about 1.00 a.m. on 14-9-2010 at Market Road, near Veterinary Hospital, Kal1am, District Osmanabad, there is no explanation on behalf of the prosecution that how the victim girl returned back to her home, and consequently, how the victim girl showed the accused to her father i.e. PW 1 Bapu Pawar the spot of incident, as if the accused was waiting for them on the said spot and the said gray area was unexplained. According to the learned Advocate for the appellant, during test identification parade, 6 dummies were used and accused had scar on his forehead and no other dummy was having such scar, and therefore, it is submitted that the said test identification parade is faulty and has not been conducted as per procedure laid down in Criminal Manual, and the said corroborative piece of evidence of test identification parade is suspicious and does not connect the appellant with the crime. 9. Learned Advocate for the appellant further submitted that PW4 Dr. Minakshi Surve, who examined the victim girl and gave medical treatment and issued medical certificate Exh.21, has stated that the injuries mentioned in certificate are possible due to blunt or sharp trauma, and she has not examined the victim girl, but was present with the doctor at the time of examination, and hence, it is canvassed that the testimony of the said doctor is self-explicit and the injuries sustained by the victim are possible due to blunt or sharp trauma and apparently, the said doctor has not examined the victim girl. Moreover, as regards the medical evidence and evidence of Forensic Science Laboratory, it is canvassed that the Chemical Analyser's report of vaginal swab is negative, as well as, no blood stains of blood group of the accused and semen stains of blood group of the accused were found, and accordingly, Chemical Analyser's reports do not support the case of the prosecution. Thus, it is submitted that the oral evidence, medical evidence, the evidence of Forensic Science Laboratory and the evidence of test identification parade, do not establish the nexus between the accused and the crime, and therefore, learned advocate for the accused/appellant urged that the present appeal deserves to be allowed and the conviction and sentence imposed upon the appellant deserves to be quashed and set aside and he deserves to be acquitted for the offences with which he was charged. 10. Learned A.P.P. Shri B.J. Sonwane for the respondent / State countered the said arguments and opposed the present appeal vehemently, and submitted that although prosecution case hinges upon the circumstantial evidence, the prosecution has proved and established each and every incriminating circumstance against the appellant firmly and unerringly and link of the chain of the said circumstantial evidence is established pointing out towards the only hypotheses of the 'guilt of the accused excluding other hypotheses. He asserted that the caste certificate was admitted by the defence which discloses that the victim girl belonged to 'Pardhi' caste. Moreover, age of the victim girl i.e. between 5 to 7 years has not been denied by the defence. Moreover, there is no denial by the accused in respect of committal of rape by the accused upon the victim girl and only defence of the accused is that false case has been filed against him due to enmity. In fact, Bapu Pawar i.e. father of the victim girl has no enmity against the accused and, therefore, there is no question of filing of false complaint by him against the accused. In fact, Bapu Pawar i.e. father of the victim girl has no enmity against the accused and, therefore, there is no question of filing of false complaint by him against the accused. As regards committal of the crime by the accused, it is submitted that the incident occurred at about 1.00 a.m. on 14-9-2010 and the medical certificate Exh.17 discloses the time of examination of the victim girl at 1.30 a.m. on 14-9-2010, and hence, it is submitted that the victim girl was immediately examined medically after committal of rape upon her and the said medical certificate Exh.17 clarifies that the rape was committed upon the said victim girl. Moreover, PW4 Dr. Minakshi Surve has produced medical case papers of the victim girl. So also, the testimony of PW2 Dr. Manju Shelke" who examined the victim girl initially and issued medical certificate Exh.17, as well as, deposition ofPW4 Dr. Minakshi Surve, who examined the victim girl and gave treatment and issued medical certificate Exh.21, are material which clarify the medical aspect of the matter that rape was committed upon the victim girl. Moreover, PW3 Dr. Satyaprem Ware examined the accused and issued medical certificate Exh19 and certified that secondary sexual characters of the accused were fully developed and the accused was able to perform sexual intercourse and he also stated that the injuries are possible if any person forcibly tries to commit rape on a minor girl, and the said aspect speaks for itself. 11. In so far as test identification parade is concerned, it is submitted that PW5 Gunderam Rathod, Tahsildar, has followed due procedure and conducted the test identification parade as per the procedure prescribed in the Criminal Manual wherein identifying witnesses i.e. complainant, victim girl, and mother of the victim, Lalabai, identified the accused, and therefore, said corroborative piece of evidence of test identification parade connects the accused with the crime. Moreover, the testimony of PW 6 Manohar Thorat, panch to the test identification parade memorandum, is also in consonance with the said evidence of test identification parade. So also, it is submitted that the evidence of spot panchanama, adduced through PW7 Archana Pataskar, is also material and there was seizure of frock and nicker of the victim and underwear of the accused from the spot thereunder. So also, it is submitted that the evidence of spot panchanama, adduced through PW7 Archana Pataskar, is also material and there was seizure of frock and nicker of the victim and underwear of the accused from the spot thereunder. Moreover, it is submitted that the Chemical Analyser's report corroborates with the theory advanced by the prosecution and blood stains and semen stains were found on the articles seized from the spot. 12. As regards the arguments canvassed by the learned advocate for the accused/appellant, in respect of non-examination of the victim girl, it is submitted that although the victim was not examined by the prosecution since she was small girl of 5 to 7 years, complaint was lodged immediately after occurrence of the incident and prosecution has produced the evidence of father of the victim, and description of the accused given by the victim to him has come on record, and therefore, non-examination of the victim girl is not fatal to the case of the prosecution. Moreover, undergarments of the accused were recovered from the spot of the incident, but the accused has not given any convincing explanation therefore. Thus, it is submitted by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the oral evidence and medical evidence, and other evidence on record adduced/produced by the prosecution, cumulatively connects the accused with the crime, and the learned trial court has assessed the evidence in proper perspective and convicted and sentenced the accused rightly, and there is no glaring mistake, and hence, no interference therein is called for in the present appeal, and urged that the present appeal be dismissed. 13. To substantiate the afore said contentions, learned A.P.P. placed reliance on the observations made in the case of Pratap s/o Bhima Kenware vs. State of Maharashtra, reported in 2005 ALL MR (Cri) 172, which are as follows :- "13. The plea of defence of false implication on account of enmity is neither plausible nor probable as, considering the age of prosecutrix - a minor girl of eight years old, it is beyond imagination that her mother would implicate the appellant accused making allegation that her minor daughter has been sexually ravished by appellant. On the other hand, the prosecutrix has exhibited natural conduct in disclosing to her mother about the incident immediately after she returned home. On the other hand, the prosecutrix has exhibited natural conduct in disclosing to her mother about the incident immediately after she returned home. The conduct of the mother of prosecutrix in taking the prosecutrix to the Police Station and from there to the hospital after seeing the bleeding injury on her private part is as natural as it could be. The fact that the prosecutrix was taken to the Police Station immediately without spending shortest time goes to show that there was no chance to implicate the appellant falsely. The fact that in the report (Exh.29) the name of the appellant is not disclosed, but the person who ravished the prosecutrix was referred as the person who was accompanying the person known to the prosecutrix as 'MAMA' (Gurumukhsing), certainly goes to show that the appellant was really the culprit. If really the mother of prosecutrix had design in her mind to fabricate a false case against the appellant, it was very easy for her to refer the appellant by his name in the report (Exh.29) as the person who committed rape on her daughter. So, finding on the evidence on record that the prosecutrix was sexually ravished by the appellant and the appellant alone, the trial Court has rightly found him guilty for the offence of commission of rape u/s. 376 of the Indian Penal Code." 14. I have perused the impugned judgment and order, dated 4.11.2011, rendered by the learned Special Judge, Osmanabad in Special Case (Atro). No. 1 of 2011, as also perused the oral as well as documentary evidence, medical evidence, the forensic science laboratory evidence and the evidence of test identification parade. I have also heard the rival submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and also considered the judicial pronouncement cited by the learned A.P.P. for the respondent/State carefully. 15. In order to deal with the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties effectively, it is necessary to advert to the material evidence adduced/ produced by the prosecution and in the said context, coming to the deposition of PW 1 Bapu Pawar, complainant, who is the father of victim girl, who stated that he is Pardhi by caste and resides at weekly bazar, Kallam with his family and he was having 5 daughters, out of which victim girl was about 7 years old. He stated that the incident took place on 13.9.2010 at the wee hours i.e. at about 1.00 a.m. when all the family members had slept on the plat form of weekly bazar after dinner. He also stated that at about 1.00 a.m. on 13.9.2010 his daughter aged about 7 years shouted, and hence, he saw towards her and noticed that she was in naked condition and she was standing and weeping. Hence, he made inquiry with her and thereafter she disclosed that one person wearing half shirt and having a sign of injury on his forehead had lifted her and took her towards the veterinary hospital which was in dilapidated condition and he pressed her mouth and lifted her towards said Veternary hospital, and there was one hall in that building and there was grass inside the said hall and the said person made her lie and inserted his penis into her vagina and he also slapped her and gave fist blows to her and further stated that the said person was standing near the spot of the incident. Hence, P.W.1 Bapu lifted and took her to the spot and the victim raised her finger towards that person who was standing beneath electric pole near Veterinary hospital. Accordingly, PW 1 Bapu saw the said person in the electric light, who had worn white shirt and who was having sign of injury on his forehead. However, the said person ran away from the said spot. Thereafter the victim took PW1 Bapu towards the spot of the incident and PW1 Bapu found shirt, frock and nicker of his daughter and underwear of the said person along with one thread of colourful version lying on the spot. Thereafter he took her i.e. the victim girl to the Government Hospital, Kallam for treatment since there was bleeding from her private part. He further stated that at about 4.00 a.m. police came in the hospital and made inquiry with him, and accordingly, the police recorded his complaint (Exh.15). 16. PW 1 Bapu further stated that on the next day morning at about 10.00 a.m. police arrived at the spot of the incident and he showed them the place of incident. Accordingly, police prepared the spot panchanama. 16. PW 1 Bapu further stated that on the next day morning at about 10.00 a.m. police arrived at the spot of the incident and he showed them the place of incident. Accordingly, police prepared the spot panchanama. Thereafter at about 11.00 a.m. he brought the victim to the Civil Hospital, Osmanabad for medical examination and treatment and she was admitted there from 11.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m. Thereafter the Medical Officer, Osmanabad advised to take her to the Civil Hospital, Solapur. Accordingly, he shifted her to the Civil Hospital, Solapur and she was admitted there for about 15 days. 17. He further stated that after the lapse of about two months, police called him and his wife Lalabai at Tahsil Office, Kallam and test identification parade was conducted there, and he, his wife Lalabai and the victim identified the accused therein. He also identified the accused in the court and also identified articles 3 and 4 shirt cum top and nicker of his daughter, article 5 i.e. underwear of the accused and articles 6 and 9 threads of pink colour. 18. In cross-examination, he stated that the incident took place in rainy season and it was raining on the date of incident, and therefore, he had slept with family under the tin shed. He denied that he and his family slept on the open platform of weekly bazar on the date of the incident and further stated that he and his family slept where he used to reside. He admitted that there is no electric supply where he resides. He also stated that market place is situated towards western side of bus stand and five minutes are required to go to the spot of the incident from his house. He further stated that he saw the accused from the distance of about 30 feet and there was mercury street light at the relevant time. However, he did not raise any shout or did not try to chase the accused after noticing him. He denied that victim girl did not raise finger towards the accused and he has not identified him. He also denied that the accused did not run away from the spot when he saw him. However, he did not raise any shout or did not try to chase the accused after noticing him. He denied that victim girl did not raise finger towards the accused and he has not identified him. He also denied that the accused did not run away from the spot when he saw him. In fact, he asserted in the further part of the cross-examination that he had seen the accused on the date of incident at about 1.00 a.m. when the victim had raised her finger towards him. 19. He further stated that he does not know whether 'accused was working in a grocery shop. He denied the defence of the accused that his wife Lalabai insisted the accused to give grocery articles on credit and accused refused to it. However, it is the matter of fact that on the day of incident there was Mahalaxmi festival. Hence, in general on the day of arrival of Laxmi no person use to give goods on credit. He further denied the defence of the accused that on the date of incident his wife asked the accused to give goods on credit and accused refused, and hence, his wife got annoyed and threatened the accused to teach him lesson and implicated him in this case falsely. He further stated that the accused is Brahmin by caste. 20. He further stated that after he took the victim to Rural Hospital, Kallam at about 2.00 a.m. after the incident. The police recorded his complaint at 4.00 a.m. He also stated that he was not present at the time of recording of spot panchanama and when the police seized the articles under the said panchanama. He categorically denied that he had seen the accused at Rural Hospital, Kallam and Tahsil Office prior to the test identification parade. He also denied that he and his wife knew the accused who was working in grocery shop. He also denied that after the incident he had not seen the spot of the incident. He further denied the case of the defence that on the date of incident the accused had not given grocery articles to his wife on credit and he himself and his wife got annoyed and filed false case against the accused. 21. He also denied that after the incident he had not seen the spot of the incident. He further denied the case of the defence that on the date of incident the accused had not given grocery articles to his wife on credit and he himself and his wife got annoyed and filed false case against the accused. 21. Sum and substance of the testimony of PW1 Bapu Pawar is that the incident in question occurred at about 1.00 a.m. on 14.9.2010 when all the family members had slept on the plat form of weekly bazar and his daughter namely, aged about 7 years, was lifted by the accused and taken towards the veterinary hospital and committed rape upon her and assaulted her. Moreover, the victim narrated the said incident to PW 1 Bapu in Pardhi language, and therefore, P.W.1 Bapu took her to the spot of incident immediately after the occurrence of the incident and the victim showed the accused who was standing beneath electric pole and PW1 Bapu saw him, but the accused ran away from the said spot. PW1 Bapu also noticed the shirt, frock and nicker of his daughter and also found underwear of the accused with one thread of colourful version lying on the spot. Thereafter immediately the victim girl was taken to the hospital for medical treatment since there was bleeding from her private part and complaint was lodged with the police at about 4.00a.m. Thereafter the victim girl was taken to the Civil Hospital, Osmanabad for medical examination and treatment and she was admitted there from 11.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m. Thereafter on the advice of the Medical Officer, Osmanabad the victim girl was shifted to the Civil Hospital, Solapur she was admitted there for about 15 days. 22. Moreover PW1 Bapu, his wife and victim girl identified the accused in test identification parade which was conducted after about 2 months of the occurrence of the incident. Admittedly the incident took place in rainy season, and therefore, the complainant and his family members had slept in the tin shed. It has also come in evidence that the distance between the spot of the incident and the house of the complainant is about five minutes. Admittedly the incident took place in rainy season, and therefore, the complainant and his family members had slept in the tin shed. It has also come in evidence that the distance between the spot of the incident and the house of the complainant is about five minutes. In fact it is clarified in the cross-examination that PW1 Balm complainant saw the accused from the distance of 30 feet and there was mercury street light at the relevant time. However, PW1 Bapu admitted that he has not raised any shout or tried to chase the accused after noticing him. He also asserted that he saw the accused at 1.00 a.m. when had raised her finger towards him. 23. Moreover, as regards the defence of the accused, he stated that he was not aware whether accused was working in a grocery shop and he categorically denied the defence of the accused that his wife Lalabai insisted upon the accused to give grocery articles on credit, but accused refused to it, and hence, the complainant and his wife implicated the accused in the present case falsely. In fact, it is brought in the cross-examination that on the date of occurrence of incident there was Mahalaxmi festival and in general on the day of arrival of Laxmi no person use to give goods on credit, and the said very facts hamper the defence of the accused. True it is that PW1 Bapu was not present at the time of spot panchanmama and when police seized the articles under the said panchanama, but admittedly the said panchanama was recorded in presence 0 two independent panchas, and hence, absence of the complainant at the time of preparation of spot panch an am a does not diminish its credibility. Moreover, apparently' there are no omissions in the complaint lodged on 14.9.2010 by PW1 Bapu and improvements in his testimony and also there do not appear to be any contradiction therein. Hence, it is apparent that the testimony of PW1 Bapu has not been shaken in the cross-examination. Therefore, same is required to be accepted. 24. Coming to the medical evidence, PW2 Dr. Hence, it is apparent that the testimony of PW1 Bapu has not been shaken in the cross-examination. Therefore, same is required to be accepted. 24. Coming to the medical evidence, PW2 Dr. Manju Shelke, who examined the victim girl, has stated that on 14.9.2010 she was attached to the Rural Hospital, Kallam as Medical Officer and at about 1.30 a.m. on the said date victim aged 51/2 years was brought by her parents in the hospital for medical examination and treatment. History of attempt of rape on victim on 14.9.2010 at 1.00 a.m. was reported by the parents of the victim. The said patient was having difficulty to walk due to pains. She examined the victim with the consent of her father. On general examination, she found no evidence of injury on any part of her body. However, local examination disclosed evidence of laceration on vagina and evidence of laceration over anal region and evidence of fresh bleeding through vaginal and anal region and the said examination was very much painful. The age of the said injury was within 1 to 2 hours and there was evidence of third degree tears. Her X-ray and blood sample was taken, however, vaginal swab could not be taken deeply due to pains and bleeding. Thereafter the patient was referred to higher center for management of third degree tear. According to her opinion, there was rape on victim and on radiological finding the age of victim was below 6 years. Thus she issued the injury certificate which is produced at Exh.17. She also opined that if a person above 42 years age tries to commit rape forcibly, then injuries mentioned in certificate Exh.17 are possible. She also noted the identification marks of victim on certificate and she also identified the victim before the court. 25. In the cross-examination, she stated that the victim was brought to the hospital by her parents and even history of rape was disclosed by them. She informed the police after clinical examination. She also stated that except vaginal region and anal region of victim there were no injuries found on her person. She denied that if a small girl while playing falls on stony portion or on a sharp wooden log, injuries mentioned in the certificate can be possible. She also denied that she has not given any final opinion in certificate Exh.17. She denied that if a small girl while playing falls on stony portion or on a sharp wooden log, injuries mentioned in the certificate can be possible. She also denied that she has not given any final opinion in certificate Exh.17. She further stated that she had not taken vaginal swab, and therefore, question of Chemical Analyser's report does not arise. She also denied that injuries mentioned in certificate Exh.17 are caused to the victim while she was playing. She further denied that she issued false certificate due to pressure of complainant. 26. Thus the testimony of PW2 Dr. Manju Shelke is self explanatory, which discloses that history of attempt of rape on victim on 14.9.2010 at about 1.00 a.m. was given by the parents of the victim. Even the said patient was having difficulty to walk due to pains. Moreover, although there was no evidence of injury on any part of her body, local examination disclosed the evidence of laceration on vagina and evidence of laceration over anal region and evidence of fresh bleeding through vaginal and anal region and the said examination was very much painful. Moreover, the age of the said injury was within 1 to 2 hours and there was evidence of third degree tears. She gave reason for not taking the vaginal swab as there was bleeding and pains therein. She has categorically opined that there was rape on victim and according to her, the age of victim was below 6 years. She proved the contents of certificate Exh.17 and stated that if a person above 42 years age tries to commit rape forcibly, then injuries mentioned in certificate Exh.17 are possible. Moreover, she also identified the victim before the court. Thus the testimony of PW2 Dr. Manju Shelke has not been demolished in the cross-examination and it supports the case of the prosecution. 27. That takes me to the testimony of PW 4 Dr. Minakshi Surve, who stated that she was attached to the Civil Hospital, Solapur at the relevant time and on 14.9.2010 victim was referred to her hospital for treatment at about 10.30 p.m. by Civil Hospital, Osmanabad. The said patient was examined by Dr. Prabhakar in her presence. She stated that victim was about 5 years and she was accompanied by her parents and medical papers of Civil Hospital, Osmanabad were brought for further management. The said patient was examined by Dr. Prabhakar in her presence. She stated that victim was about 5 years and she was accompanied by her parents and medical papers of Civil Hospital, Osmanabad were brought for further management. She stated that victim was serious and her blood pressure was low, and therefore, necessary medical treatment was given to her and she was admitted for about 11 days in the said hospital and she was discharged on 25.9.2010. She also produced all medical papers of the said victim girl on record, which disclosed the medical treatment given to her in the said hospital from 14.9.2010 to 25.9.2010. She also produced medical certificate at Exh.21, is well as she identified the victim in the court. In the cross-examination, she stated that patient was under observation of senior doctor Prabhakar. She admitted that she has no right to give final opinion. She further stated that history was prepared by senior doctor Prabhakar. She also stated that as per directions given by senior doctor, she prepared medical papers of the case. She opined that the injuries mentioned in the certificate are possible due to blunt or sharp trauma. She also admitted that she had not personally examined the victim but she was present with senior doctor at the time of examination. She further stated that she prepared the discharge card as per the directions of senior doctor and after perusal of medical papers. 28. Accordingly, the testimony of PW 4 Dr. Minakshi Surve reflects that she assisted Dr. Prabhakar, who examined the victim in Civil Hospital, Solapur at the relevant time and the victim was admitted in the hospital for about 11 days. She also produced the medical papers of the victim along with the discharge card Exh.20 and medical certificate Exh.21. Moreover, she stated that the victim was clinically examined and no surgery was performed on her in the said hospital. She categorically stated that the injuries mentioned in the certificate are possible due to blunt or sharp trauma, although she had not personally examined the victim, but she was present with senior doctor at the time of examination. Hence, it is apparent that testimony of PW4 Dr. Minakshi Surve is in consonance with the deposition of PW2 Dr. Manju Shelke and both the said testimonies and medical papers and certificates produced by them cumulatively connect the accuse'd with the crime. 29. Hence, it is apparent that testimony of PW4 Dr. Minakshi Surve is in consonance with the deposition of PW2 Dr. Manju Shelke and both the said testimonies and medical papers and certificates produced by them cumulatively connect the accuse'd with the crime. 29. That takes me to the testimony of PW3 Dr. Satyaprem Ware, who stated that he was attached to Rural Hospital, Kallam as Medical Officer since last five years and on 14.9.2010 at 8.25 p.m. accused Sharad Kulkarni was produced by police for medical examination. Accordingly, he examined the said patient clinically and observed following injuries. 1. Abrasion - 0.5 x 0.5 cm. at scrotum region 2. Contusion - at right supra orbital region 1 x 1 cm. He stated that both the injuries are due to hard and blunt object which are fresh injuries within 24 hours and simple in nature. He also stated that blood, semen and pubic hair of accused were sent to the Chemical Analyser. Secondary sexual characters were fully developed and accused was able to perform sexual intercourse. Accordingly, he issued medical certificate which is produced at Exh.19. He also brought MLC register and issued certificate as per the said register. He opined that injuries mentioned in the certificate can be possible if any person forcibly tries to commit rape on a minor girl. As regards injury no.2 he stated that it is possible if the head of a person comes in contact with a hard surface. During cross-examination, he admitted that injuries mentioned in certificate Exh.19 are simple injuries, which can be caused by other means also. He also stated that even if person falls on hard surface, then injuries mentioned in the certificate are possible. Further he stated that it cannot be specifically said that while attempting for rape on minor girl, injuries mentioned in the certificate can be possible. Even he was unable to state the specific age of the injuries. He further stated that as per requisition by the police, he sent blood, pubic hair and semen of accused to the Chemical Analyser. 30. Thus the testimony of PW3 Dr. Ware clarifies that there were injuries on the vital part i.e. private part of the accused and he sustained contusion on his forehead and both the injuries were caused due to hard and blunt object and within 24 hours and simple in nature. 30. Thus the testimony of PW3 Dr. Ware clarifies that there were injuries on the vital part i.e. private part of the accused and he sustained contusion on his forehead and both the injuries were caused due to hard and blunt object and within 24 hours and simple in nature. His opinion is material when he stated that injuries mentioned in Exh.19 can be possible if any person forcibly tries to commit rape on a minor girl. The said testimony has not been shattered in the cross-examination. Thus, the said testimony clarifies that the accused was able to perform sexual intercourse and secondary sexual characters were fully developed and his private part sustained abrasion and forehead sustained contusion and the said injuries speak for themselves and amount to incriminating piece of evidence against the accused. 31. Turning to the evidence of test identification parade and in the said context, the prosecution has examined PW5 Gunderam Biraj Rathod, who stated that he was working as Tahsildar, Kallam and also as Executive Magistrate at the relevant time and he received letters, dated 26.10.2010 and 16.11.2010 from the S.D.P.O., Kallam to conduct the test identification parade, which are produced on record at Exhs.24 and 25. Accordingly, he issued letter to the S.D.P.O., Kallam to keep the accused present for test identification parade at Tahsil Office, Kallam on 24.11.2010 and the copy of the said letter is produced at Exh.26. Thus the accused was produced in Tahsil Office on 24.11.2010 fox test identification parade. Accordingly 6 dummies of similar age and description of the accused were called, as well as 3 panchas were called and necessary formalities were observed including asking the accused whether he intended to change the clothes, but he replied in the negative. The said dummies were asked to stand in a row and the accused also stood at Sr. No.3 in the said row. PW5 Rathod stated that he conducted the test identification parade in the court hall of the Tahsil Office, Kallam and the complainant PW 1 Bapu was called in the said parade hall and he observed all dummies and thereafter identified the accused by touching his shirt and stated that he was the accused. Thereafter he sent the complainant PW1 Bapu in the ante chamber. Thereafter he sent the complainant PW1 Bapu in the ante chamber. He further stated that thereafter the place of the accused was changed in the row of dummies and next witness i.e. victim was called and she entered into parade hall and observed all dummies including the accused in the row and went near the row and identified the accused, who was standing at Sr. No.2 in the row, by touching his shirt. Thereafter the victim was sent to the ante chamber. He further stated that thereafter number of dummies in the row were changed and the accused stood at Sr. No.5 in the row and mother of the victim namely Lalabai was called in the parade hall and she observed all the dummies including the accused and reached near the accused who was standing at Sr. No.5 in the row and identified him by catching his shirt and thereafter she was sent to the ante chamber. 32. PW5 Rathod further stated that thereafter he called the police personnel and handed over him in their custody. Accordingly, he prepared the parade memorandum in presence of the panchas and obtained the signatures of the dummies and the panchas thereon and the said parade memorandum is produced at Exh.27. Thereafter he handed over the parade memorandum to the S.D.P.O., Kallam in the sealed condition along with the covering letter, dated 26.11.2010, which is marked at Exh.28. 33. During cross-examination, he denied that prior to arrival of the accused in the Tahsil Office, Kallam, witnesses were present in the premises of his office. He admitted that the face of the accused was not wrapped by cloth when he was brought in the office. He denied that prior to the test identification parade, the accused was shown to all the witnesses. He also admitted that he has not mentioned the age and their residence of each dummy on the parade memorandum. He further stated that some dummies were present in the Tahsil Office and some were called from the outside premises of the Tahsil Office. He also stated that there is no mention in parade memorandum that parade was conducted at 4.00 p.m. and the accused was produced on 24.11.2010 at about 3.00 p.m. in the office. 34. Accordingly, the said witness was cross-examined by the defence counsel at length, but nothing beneficial to the case of the accused could be elicited there from. He also stated that there is no mention in parade memorandum that parade was conducted at 4.00 p.m. and the accused was produced on 24.11.2010 at about 3.00 p.m. in the office. 34. Accordingly, the said witness was cross-examined by the defence counsel at length, but nothing beneficial to the case of the accused could be elicited there from. It is apparent that the said witness was working as Executive Magistrate at Kallam and he conducted the test identification parade as per the request of S.D.P.O., Kallam. He has no reason to prepare a false test identification parade memo. Although searching cross-examination of the said witness was conducted, no incriminating circumstance could be brought on record to discredit the test identification parade. The said evidence of test identification parade is cogent and same has been corroborated by the testimonies of complainant PW1 Bapu and Head Constable PW11 Bhale on material aspects, and hence, same deserves to be given due credence, since there is nothing to disbelieve the same. 35. That takes me to the testimony of PW6 Manohar Thorat, panch to test identification parade, who stated that he was called to the Tahsil Office by the Tahsildar PW5 Rathod on 24.11.2010, and accordingly, he went there and that other panchas Balasaheb Sakhare and Navnath Thorat were already present there. PW5 Rathod instructed him that a parade was to be conducted about the suspect and requested him to act as panch. Accordingly, the accused occupied seat in the left side of ante chamber and the witnesses sat in the right side of ante chamber. He stated that PW5 Rathod asked 6 dummies to stand in one row in parade hall. Thereafter PW5 Rathod called the accused and asked him to stand in the row of dummies as per his wish. He also asked whether he desired to change the clothes, but accused declined therefor. Accordingly, the accused stood at Sr.No.3 in the row of dummies from left side. Thereafter complainant PW 1 Bapu was brought in the parade hall through peon and he observed all the dummies including the accused standing in the row and caught hold of the shirt of the accused who was standing at Sr.No.3 in the row and identified him. Thereafter, PW 1 Bapu was sent in another room in ante chamber. Thereafter complainant PW 1 Bapu was brought in the parade hall through peon and he observed all the dummies including the accused standing in the row and caught hold of the shirt of the accused who was standing at Sr.No.3 in the row and identified him. Thereafter, PW 1 Bapu was sent in another room in ante chamber. Further PW5 Rathod asked the accused whether he desired to change his place in the row and the accused stood at Sr.No.2 from left in the row of dummies. Thereafter victim girl was brought in the parade hall and she observed all the dummies including the accused standing in the row and identified the accused by catching his shirt. Thereafter, she was sent in the room where PW1 Bapu was sent. Thereafter PW5 Rathod asked the accused whether he intended to change the place in the row, and accordingly, accused stood at Sr.No.5 from left in the row. Thereafter Lalabai i.e. mother of the victim was brought in the parade hall' and she observed all the dummies including the accused standing in the row and caught hold of the shirt of the accused who was standing at Sr. No.5 in the row and identified him. Thereafter, PW5 Rathod sent Lalabai in the room where PW1 Bapu and victim girl were sent earlier. Thereafter PW5 Rathod prepared identification parade memorandum in presence of panch as and obtained their signatures thereon and the said parade memorandum is produced at Exh.27. 36. During cross-examination he specifically stated that at about 3.00 p.m. to 3.30 p.m. on 24.11.2010 he was called by the Tahsildar PW5 Rathod for identification parade and other panchas were already present there. He denied that police personnel obtained his signatures on blank papers. He also denied that PW5 Rathod did not prepare the identification parade memorandum in his presence. The said witness was also cross-examined at length, but his testimony has not been shaken to disbelieve the prosecution story. In fact PW6 Manohar Thorat is the independent witness and he has no reason to give false evidence against the accused. Considering the fact that he has no previous acquaintance or enmity with the accused, he deposed as per the occurrence of the incident during the identification parade of the accused. Hence, there is no reason to disbelieve his testimony. In fact PW6 Manohar Thorat is the independent witness and he has no reason to give false evidence against the accused. Considering the fact that he has no previous acquaintance or enmity with the accused, he deposed as per the occurrence of the incident during the identification parade of the accused. Hence, there is no reason to disbelieve his testimony. Moreover, his evidence has been corroborated by the testimony of PW5 Rathod on material particulars, and hence, same deserves to be accepted as incriminating corroborative piece of evidence against the accused. 37. As regards the evidence of spot panchanama, which was prepared in presence of panch witness, PW7 Archana Pataskar sated that after the occurrence of the incident, the investigating officer arrived on the spot and prepared the spot panchanama in her presence on 14.9.2010. While preparing the spot panchanama, she had been to the open ground of weekly market of Kallam where PW 1 Bapu Pawar showed the spot of the incident, which was a platform having tin roof. Thereafter, PW5 Bapu took all of them towards the Veternary hospital which was at a distance of 1000 ft from the said platform. There was one godown which was in dilapidated condition and one frock, one nicker of a small girl and one gents underwear were found lying on the said spot. Accordingly, all the said articles were seized by the police under the spot panchanama (Exh.32). Moreover, PW7 Archana Pataskar identified all the seized articles from the spot. During cross examination, she stated that police called her in the police station at about 9.00 a.m. and thereafter at about 10.00 a.m. they proceeded to weekly bazar place at Kallam for panchanama. He also stated that the place of platform was situated at a distance of 20-25 feet away from the road. He further stated that the godown is in dilapidated condition and the villagers throw garbage in the said godown. She categorically stated that PW1 Bapu Pawar had brought all the seized articles with him in the police station. She denied that police have not prepared the spot panchanama in her presence. PW7 Archana Pataskar is an independent witness and she has categorically stated all the events occurred while preparing the spot panchanama. Hence, her evidence is worthy of credence and there is no reason to discard the same. She denied that police have not prepared the spot panchanama in her presence. PW7 Archana Pataskar is an independent witness and she has categorically stated all the events occurred while preparing the spot panchanama. Hence, her evidence is worthy of credence and there is no reason to discard the same. It is surfaced through her evidence that one frock, one nicker of a small girl and one gents underwear were found on the said spot and same were seized under the said spot panchanama. 38. Besides that, the prosecution has produced the Chemical Analyser's reports Exhs.56 and 57 on record. It is apparent there from that blood group of victim is 'B' as reflected in the report of chemical analysis Exh.57. Moreover; clothes of the victim and clothes of the accused were seized and pertinently the chemical analysis report Exh.56 shows that the soil and the threads found on the spot were having blood stains. Moreover, the T-shirt and full pant of the accused were also having some blood stains, even semen stains were also found on the front middle portion of nicker of the victim. Moreover, the blood which was found on the clothes of the accused was of human and the semen detected on the nicker of the victim is also human semen. Further the blood stains detected on the nicker of the victim is of blood group 'B' which is of the victim. Thus, considering the said Chemical Analyser's reports Exhs.56 and 57, it is amply clear that some blood and semen stains were found on the clothes of the victim and also on the clothes of the accused. Accordingly, the evidence of the Forensic Science Laboratory strengthens the case of the accused and connects the accused with the crime. Pertinently, the accused has not given any .explanation about the seizure of his underwear from the spot of the incident. 39. The prosecution has produced the caste certificate of the accused, who belongs to Brahmin community through the police officials. Moreover, the caste certificate of the complainant disclosing that he belongs to Pardhi community was also produced at Exh.44, which confirms that the complainant belonged to Pardhi community. The investigation was carried out under the supervision of PWl4 Dy. S.P. Bhagat since offence pertained to Section 3(1)(xii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 40. Moreover, the caste certificate of the complainant disclosing that he belongs to Pardhi community was also produced at Exh.44, which confirms that the complainant belonged to Pardhi community. The investigation was carried out under the supervision of PWl4 Dy. S.P. Bhagat since offence pertained to Section 3(1)(xii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 40. In so far as the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the accused in respect of non-examination of the victim girl, admittedly the victim was of tender age of 5 to 6 years and since she was taken for medical examination immediately at 1.30 a.m. after the occurrence of the incident at about 1.00 a.m. and the history was given before the Medical Officer in respect of rape and considering the cogent evidence of the complainant PW1 Bapu Pawar the father of the victim girl and the medical evidence and the evidence of the Forensic Science, which connects the accused with the crime and also considering the corroborative piece of evidence of test identification parade, non-examination of the said victim girl will not diminish the credibility of the prosecution evidence. Moreover, the victim girl brought PW 1 Bapu Pawar to the spot of the incident immediately after the .occurrence of the incident and showed the accused by raising finger towards him and since PW 1 Bapu saw the accused in the light of electric pole, there is no substance in the argument canvassed by the learned counsel for the accused that it is not digestible that victim showed the spot of the incident immediately after occurrence of the incident, as if he was waiting there for them and the close proximity of the time of the incident and the time of taking victim to her father to the spot of the incident and showing the accused in the light of electric pole clarifies the said alleged gray area. 41. 41. In the circumstances, after having taken the entire survey of tangible evidence i.e. oral, documentary, medical, Forensic Science, test identification parade, I am not impressed by the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the accused, and it is apparently clear that the learned Trial Judge has scrutinized and assessed the evidence in proper perspective and thereafter convicted and sentenced the accused and there is no glaring mistake therein, and therefore, no interference is called for therein in the present appeal, and hence, present appeal deserves to be rejected. 42. In the result, present appeal, which is sans merits, stands dismissed and the conviction and sentence imposed upon the accused/appellant by the judgment and order, dated 4.11.2011, rendered by the learned Special Judge, Osmanabad, in Special (Atro.) Case No. 1 of 2011, stands upheld and confirmed. Registry to inform the Appellant in the jail accordingly. 43. The Advocates appointed for Appellant and Respondent no.2, through Legal Services Committee, be paid their remunerations, as per rules. Appeal dismissed.