JUDGMENT ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI, J. 1. Appellant, Sujit Kumar @ Sujit Kumar Yadav @ Sujji has filed instant appeal against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 29.04.2000 passed by 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Munger in sessions trial no. 428 of 1997 and 43 of 1998 whereby and whereunder, he has been convicted for an offence punishable under Sections 366 (A), 376(2)(G) of the IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for eight years respectively under both counts with a further direction to run the sentences concurrently. 2. Devan Yadav (PW-2) filed a written report on 12.11.1996 disclosing therein that his eldest daughter Rukmani aged about 14 years had come to Munger on 10.11.1996 at about 2:00 p.m. to see Goddess Kaali. When she did not return, they became worried and on account thereof, they proceeded to Munger in her search and during course thereof, they came to know that Arjun Yadav, Milan Yadav, Sujit Kumar @ Sujit Kumar Yadav @ Sujji were along with his daughter while going towards Lal Darwaza. They reached at Lal Darwaza at the house of Arjun Yadav and enquired about her daughter who disowned. However, he found apparel of his daughter hanging as well as also found her sandal outside the door. Wife of Arjun Yadav disclosed that the girl had come but was taken away by Milan Yadav and Sujji. Then they went to Milan Yadav who on query began to abuse and further threatened that in case of approaching police, he will be murdered. He became apprehensive. However, any how he had gone to Superintendent of Police and as per direction, he came to Mufassil P.S. where he had tendered written report. On the basis of the aforesaid written report Mufassil P.S. Case No. 329 of 1996 was registered followed with investigation as well as submission of charge-sheet, ultimately, leading to trial meeting with judgment of conviction and sentence, the subject matter of instant appeal. 3. The defence case as is evident from mode of cross-examination as well as from the statement recorded under Section 313 of the Cr. P.C is of complete denial of occurrence. Side by side, it has also been pleaded that victim was a consenting party who on her own indulged under lecherous activity in the background of affectionate relationship. Subsequently, as she has been overpowered by her guardian became hostile to appellant and to support the same DWs. P.C is of complete denial of occurrence. Side by side, it has also been pleaded that victim was a consenting party who on her own indulged under lecherous activity in the background of affectionate relationship. Subsequently, as she has been overpowered by her guardian became hostile to appellant and to support the same DWs. have also been examined through which the letters written by the victim to the appellant have been exhibited. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant raised manifold arguments while challenging the judgment impugned. The first and foremost argument is that as per para-14 of the judgment, the learned lower court had after appreciation of the evidence concluded that the victim was a consenting party. However, the conviction and sentence has arisen on account of minority of the victim. As such, it has been submitted that it happens to be a fit case in the background of aforesaid finding whereunder the sentence even maintaining conviction should be made sterile as period already undergone. 5. In an alternative, it has been submitted that victim, during course of her examination, had shown her age to be 18 years but was major on the date of occurrence itself and that happens to be reason behind that the prosecution party had influenced the doctor during course of medical examination and on account thereof, her age was not ascertained. It has further been submitted that the victim was habituated with act of coitus as vagina, on the day of her examination, admitted two fingers along with absence of injury over her person and in the aforesaid background, again emphasis has been made that it was not a case to be dragged under Section 376 of the IPC as well as 366(A) of the IPC. It has also been submitted that witnesses are not at all consistent on each and every material point, hence the judgment of conviction and sentence recorded by learned trial court is fit to be set aside. 6. On the other hand, the learned APP while refuting the submission, submitted that when the victim, a minor said that she had not consented then presumption will be in her favour without having any scope of rebuttal. 6. On the other hand, the learned APP while refuting the submission, submitted that when the victim, a minor said that she had not consented then presumption will be in her favour without having any scope of rebuttal. The victim, Raukmani Devi during course of her evidence had categorically stated that she was ravished by appellant and on account thereof, the conviction and sentence recorded by learned trial court happens to be just, legal and proper. 7. In order to support its case, the prosecution had examined altogether 8 PWs. out of whom PW-1, Rukmani Devi (victim), PW-2, Devan Yadav, PW-3, Meena Devi, PW-4, Srikant Pd. Yadav, PW-5, Dr. Sunil Kumar Singh (formal), PW-6, Dr. Bibha Kumari Singh, PW-7, Narbdeshwar Ojha (Part I.O.) and PW-8, Chandeshwar Narain Singh (main I.O.) as well as had also exhibited Ext-1, Fard-e-beyan, Ext-2 Sanha dated 27.11.1996, Ext-3, medical examination report. 8. Defence had also examined two DWs. out of whom DW-1 is Pankaj Kumar Yadav, DW-2 is Mahesh Yadav, as well as also exhibited Ext-A to A/6 signature of victim over different documents, Ext-B to B/5 are the letters alleged to in the pen of Rukmani Devi, the victim and Ext-C is an affidavit. 9. As per the evidence of PW-6 the doctor, she had examined the victim on 16.11.1996 and found the following:- "Axillary and pubic have present. Pelvic examination shows old ruptures (ruptured) hymen. Vagina admitted two finger loose. No signs of violence on any part of body. Lab report of vaginal smear shows absence of spermatozoa motile or non motile. Only WBS & epithetical cells were present. Above findings shows absence of forceful coitus." 10. Thus, from the evident of the doctor, it is apparent that apart from identifying the victim accustomed to coitus and on that very basis given the affining the factum of rape. It is also apparent from Ext-3 that it had not carried examination over estimation of the age nor the PW-5 or PW-6 during course of their evidence enlighten the issue that during course of examination of victim, examination with regard to her age was also conducted. Therefore, there happens to be absence of medical evidence with regard to ascertainment of age of victim. 11. Therefore, there happens to be absence of medical evidence with regard to ascertainment of age of victim. 11. From the evidence of PW-8, the I.O. it is evident that after recovery of the victim, she was subjected to medical examination whereunder her age was estimated in between 15 to 16 but the reason best known to the prosecution aforesaid material has not been brought on record. In likewise manner, the school leaving certificate having filed on behalf of prosecution has also not been exhibited. As such, the oral evidence has to be seen on the point of age. From para-6 of the judgment impugned, it is apparent that the learned trial court had dealt with the evidence of all the PWs. as well as deficiency on the part of the appellant to test the genuineness of assertion so deposed by the PWs. has been properly dealt with. The aforesaid fact has to be perceived in the background of admitted fact that appellant happens to be uncle of victim and on account thereof, the date of birth or the age of victim must have been within his personal knowledge as well as within the know of his family and on account thereof, had there been any sort of controversy, it was expected at the end of appellant to have examined DWs. on the score of age also. As such, the age of victim so concluded by the learned trial court to be round about 15 years is found reasonable, acceptable and accordingly, concurred with. 12. Once the victim is found minor, below the age of 18 years, then in that circumstance, consent has got no value. Moreover, the victim, PW-1 during course of her evidence had categorically stated that she was ravished at the hand of appellant. Appellant by way of exhibiting series of documents including the love letters allegedly, written by victim to him, loses its impact as well as identity as the victim happens to be below the age of 18 years. Evidence of other witnesses happens to be corroborative one. Even presence of infirmity in their deposition is not going to ruin the prosecution case because of the fact that Rukmani, the victim happens to below the age of 18 years. As such, the findings arrived at by learned lower court did not attract any sort of interference. 13. Evidence of other witnesses happens to be corroborative one. Even presence of infirmity in their deposition is not going to ruin the prosecution case because of the fact that Rukmani, the victim happens to below the age of 18 years. As such, the findings arrived at by learned lower court did not attract any sort of interference. 13. Praying for clemency in the background of consenting flavour as well as conclusive finding by the learned lower court on that score, the sentence finds interference as period already undergone. Appellant, really deserves so? The victim was adolescent and therefore, was subject to allurement in the background of eagerness as well as natural affection towards opposite sex. Being of tender age, it was not expected at her end to know about right or wrong that too when she is being spoiled by her uncle. Virtually, appellant being uncle and being indulged in such kind of lecherous activity is highly deplorable. 14. As a result of which, findings rendered by learned lower court do not require interference even on the point of sentence. The appeal is found devoid of merit and is accordingly, dismissed. 15. Appellant is on bail, his bail bond is cancelled. He is directed to surrender before the learned lower court to serve out the remaining part of sentence failing which, learned lower court will take proper legal recourse to secure attendance of appellant.