JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 20.11.2004 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Churu in Special Sessions Case No. 51/2003 recording conviction of accused-appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 376(1) I.P.C. read with Section 3 (2)(v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and awarding sentence as under : 323 I.P.C. One month's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo 15 days' additional rigorous imprisonment. 376(1) I.P.C. Imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 1000/- in default of payment of fine further to undergo six months' additional rigorous imprisonment. 3(2)(v) SC/ST Imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 1000/- (Prevention of in default of payment of fine further to Atrocities) Act, undergo six months' additional rigorous 1989 imprisonment. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that on 23.9.2003 at about 9:00 pm one Shri Chandra Ram Meghwal orally reported at Police Station, Ratangarh about commission of rape with his minor daughter "K" (complete name of victim has not been given consciously) by the accused-appellant. As per the information given "K" aged 10 years went to the fields to get the goats grazed and returned to home at about 5:00 pm. At that time she was weeping and on asking stated that accused Subhan caught hold of her and then committed rape in the field of Ramjan. Hearing her screams Bhagwana Ram came towards the spot and on seeing him the accused tried to flee. On being chased by Bhagwana Ram, the accused gave beating to him also. 3. On basis of the information aforesaid a case was lodged (being FIR No. 245/2003) for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3(xii) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 4. During the course of investigation medical examination of the victim girl and injured-Bhagwana Ram was made. The accused was arrested and was also subjected to medical examination. After completion of investigation, a police report as per provisions of Section 173 Cr. P.C., was submitted before the competent court and the case was then committed to the Court of Sessions. 4. During the course of investigation medical examination of the victim girl and injured-Bhagwana Ram was made. The accused was arrested and was also subjected to medical examination. After completion of investigation, a police report as per provisions of Section 173 Cr. P.C., was submitted before the competent court and the case was then committed to the Court of Sessions. After hearing counsel for the accused-Subhan Khan charges for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(f), 323 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 were framed and on denial of the same, the trial commenced as desired. 5. The prosecution supported its case with the aid of eleven witnesses (PW-1 to PW-11) and by exhibiting several documents (Exhibit-P/1 to Exhibit-P/25). An opportunity was given to the accused to explain the adverse circumstances appearing in prosecution evidence, wherein he termed the evidence adduced as false and concocted. In defence document (Exhibit-D/1) i.e. statement given by injured Bhagwana Ram during the course of investigation as per Section 161 Cr. P.C., was exhibited. 6. After examining the entire evidence available on record and hearing counsel for the accused and the learned Public Prosecutor, the trial court held the accused guilty for the offences charged and sentenced him accordingly. 7. In appeal, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the appellant is that no evidence is available on record to establish that the offence was committed by the accused only to depress and victimise a member of scheduled caste, thus, the conviction recorded under Section 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989 is erroneous. It is further submitted that no adequate evidence is available on record for commission of rape by the accused. It is asserted that as per the report given by Forensic Science Laboratory, no semen was found in the swab taken from vulva and the vaginal secretion and this fact is sufficient enough to arrive at the conclusion that the charge pertaining to commission of rape is ill-founded. 8. Per contra, as per learned Public Prosecutor the evidence adduced by prosecutrix "K", eye-witness Bhagwana Ram (PW-7) and other medical evidence available on record is adequate to arrive at the conclusion that rape was committed by the accused with the minor girl. 8. Per contra, as per learned Public Prosecutor the evidence adduced by prosecutrix "K", eye-witness Bhagwana Ram (PW-7) and other medical evidence available on record is adequate to arrive at the conclusion that rape was committed by the accused with the minor girl. The accused was knowing the caste and social background of the victim, therefore, crime was committed under the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989. 9. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor. 10. Before coming to other merits of the case we deem it appropriate to mention the details pertaining to medical evidence available on record.Dr. M.G. Gupta (PW-5), Junior Specialist (Radiology) at General Hospital, Ratangarh examined prosecutrix "K" for determination of her age. As per this witness, he took x-ray plating of the knee, wrist and pelvis part of the girl in addition to other general observations for determination of her age and by considering all the relevant factors, a finding was given that the age of the victim was less than 9 years and more than 13 years.Dr. Ved Prakash (PW-4) Junior Specialist (Surgery) also examined prosecutrix "K". As per this witness, the victim girl was of normal built having 28 teeth, less developed hairs in armpit and the public hairs too were less grown. Breast and areola were also not developed. This witness further stated that when he examined the victim girl, she was suffering from severe pain at her private parts. Both the thighs were highly blood-stained, hymen was ruptured by 3 Millimeter. He also stated that the vagina of the victim was hard and was of small size. As a matter of fact, this witness verified all the details given in his examination report (Exh.P/2) prescribing as under:- "Examination of genitalia:- Public hairs fine and poorly developed. No matting of foreign body seen. Labia Major and Minor under developed. There was staining of body fluid mixed with blood over inner aspect of both thigh near to genitalia, swab taken and preserved as A. There is abrasion of mucosa of vaginal wall, lunar shape as shown in diagram, about 1 cm area including tourchettal. Oozing ++ on touch. Hymen teared (3 mm) over posterior margin. Oozing on touch ++ and tender opening of hymen. Duration of injury within 24 hours. Oozing ++ on touch. Hymen teared (3 mm) over posterior margin. Oozing on touch ++ and tender opening of hymen. Duration of injury within 24 hours. P.S. - Vaginal orifice light, oozing + over lower part, cervix smaller than normal size, with normal secretion. P.V.- Vaginal orifice one finger right, examination is painful. Uterus smaller than normal size. Advised - USG of pelvic organ for detection of pregnancy. For age - advised x-ray wrist, elbow and pelvic bone." 11. The medical evidence noticed above clearly indicates forcible sexual intercourse with prosecutrix "K".Dr. Ibrahim Chippa (PW-6) Medical Jurist at Government Hospital, Ratangarh examined accused-Subhan Khan. As per this witness, he found the accused competent to have sexual intercourse on his medical examination. 12. In view of the statements given by the Dr. M.G. Gupta (PW-5), Dr. Ved Prakash Purohit (PW-6), we are having no doubt that the victim was aged between 9 to 13 years, as such, was a minor. The question now deserves consideration is about the involvement of the accused in the crime in-question.Prosecutrix "K" (PW-1) in quite specific terms stated that when she was moving with her cattle, accused came and forcibly took her to the agricultural field of Ramjan and committed rape. She further stated that on hearing the the loud cry of her Baba Bhagwana Ram came to the spot of occurrence. Subhan on seeing him tried to flee from the spot, but was chased by Bhagwana Ram. He then gave a stick blow to Bhagwana Ram, consequent to that an injury occurred. She reiterated that Subhan caught hold of her and committed rape and at that time she suffered severe pain.PW-2 Vimla elder sister of the victim "K" stated that at about 3:00 pm, "K" went out with goats and she returned at 5:00 pm and at that time she was weeping. She conveyed to her that Subhan raped her. She was having bite marks on her cheeks and her legs were heavily stained with blood. PW-3 Chandra Ram also substantiated the facts stated by PW-2 Vimla.PW-7 Bhagwana Ram stated that he heard screams of a girl from the field of Ramjan, therefore, he rushed towards the field and found accused Subhan committing rape with "K". This witness further stated that Subhan abused him and also gave some blows and fled from the place of occurrence. PW-3 Chandra Ram also substantiated the facts stated by PW-2 Vimla.PW-7 Bhagwana Ram stated that he heard screams of a girl from the field of Ramjan, therefore, he rushed towards the field and found accused Subhan committing rape with "K". This witness further stated that Subhan abused him and also gave some blows and fled from the place of occurrence. As per this witness he took victim "K" to her residence and also accompanied Chandra Ram (PW-3) to the Police Station.PW-10 Dr. Pramod Narang medically examined Bhagwana Ram (PW-7) and as per him Bhagwana Ram was having injury on his left arm. 13. The evidence discussed above clearly indicates involvement of accused in the crime in-question. Suffice to mention here that Forensic Science Laboratory in its report (Exh.P/25) detected semen on the underwear of the accused as well as of victim "K". 14. The evidence discussed above is sufficient to arrive at the conclusion that the accused committed rape with victim "K". The conviction for the offence punishable under Section 376 (1) I.P.C. is, thus, well-founded. The conviction for the offence punishable under Section 323 I.P.C. too stands established in view of the injuries suffered by Bhagwana Ram. 15. The issue now deserves consideration is about the guilt of accused-appellant for the offence punishable under Section 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989. The prosecution was having burden to establish that the accused committed rape with "K" on the ground that she was a member of scheduled caste, however, no evidence is available on record to prove the same. The prosecution utterly failed to establish that the offence punishable under Section 376(1) I.P.C. was committed by the accused only on the count that victim "K" was belonging to scheduled caste. Thus, while affirming the conviction of accused-appellant for the offence under Section 376 (1) I.P.C. and 323 I.P.C., we deem it appropriate to acquit him from the charge for the offence punishable under Section 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989. 16. Thus, while affirming the conviction of accused-appellant for the offence under Section 376 (1) I.P.C. and 323 I.P.C., we deem it appropriate to acquit him from the charge for the offence punishable under Section 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989. 16. The issue now requires consideration is with regard to sentence deserves to be awarded on being convicted for the offence punishable under Section 376(1) I.P.C. From perusal of record it reveals that the appellant at the time of incident was of 20 years of age and he is also coming from lower echelon of society, as such, instead of sentencing him with life term imprisonment we deem it appropriate to award a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a term of 14 years. 17. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in-part. The conviction of the accused-appellant for the offence punishable under Section 3(2) (v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is set aside. The conviction recorded and the sentence awarded for the offence punishable under Section 323 I.P.C. is affirmed. The conviction of the accused-appellant for the offence punishable under Section 376(1) I.P.C. is also affirmed, however, the sentence of life term imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1000/- is substituted by the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a term of 14 years with a fine of Rs. 1000/-. In the event of default in payment of fine, he shall be liable to undergo one month's additional simple imprisonment.Appeal Partly Allowed. *******