JUDGMENT : (Per- Hon'ble Ravindra Nath Kakkar, J.) These are two connected jail appeals. In the Jail Appeal No. 7262 of 2007 there was a delay of 30 days. Vide order dated 24.10.2007, delay was condoned and appeal was admitted. The appellant in both the appeals is Hari Kishan and both the appeals are directed against the judgement and order dated 25.09.2006 passed by the trial court in S.T. No. 336 of 2005 State Vs. Hari Kishan @ Jaishree, arising out of case crime No. 53 of 2005, under section 376 IPC, Police Station Surajpur, District Gautam Budh Nagar. 2. Prosecution story in brief is that on the basis of written report dated 3.4.2005 complainant Kallu Yadav deposed that on 3.4.2005 at about 8.30 morning, his daughter Yasmin, aged about 6 years went to a shop to purchase the tea leaf. On the way when she reached in front of the under construction house of one Meharban, a labour Hari Kishan called her, caught hold and entered inside the under constructed building. It is further alleged that when his daughter did not return, he along with his wife made inquiry and thereafter it was informed by neighbourers residing there that they saw Hari Kishan entering into the constructed house with the alleged victim. On being reached there they heard the shrieks of the victim, they entered into the semi constructed house along with wife and neighbourers, they saw that Hari Kishan in a compromising position with his daughter in naked position. Hari Kishan was caught hold red handed. His daughter was profusely bleeding, thereafter they were going to report at the police station along with the injured daughter and accused Hari Kishan. The accused Hari Kishan fled away taking the advantage of crowd assembled there. 3. On the basis of written report FIR was lodged at police station as case crime no. 53 of 2005, under section 376 IPC (Chik FIR is exhibit Ka-7), its written entry was made in the G.D. Investigation was conducted, prosecutrix was medically examined at 12.30 on the same day i.e. 3.4.2005 (medical report is exhibit Ka-2). Supplementary report was prepared which is exhibit Ka-3, site plan was prepared which is exhibit Ka-5. The statements of the witnesses were recorded and after completion of the investigation charge sheet has been filed against the accused-appellant under section 376 IPC. 4. Supplementary report was prepared which is exhibit Ka-3, site plan was prepared which is exhibit Ka-5. The statements of the witnesses were recorded and after completion of the investigation charge sheet has been filed against the accused-appellant under section 376 IPC. 4. Charges were framed against the accused-appellant which was denied by him and claimed to be tried. 5. In support of the prosecution case P.W. 1 Kallu Yadav, P.W. 2 Halima, P.W. 3 Yasmin (victim), P.W. 4 Dr. Anshu Gupta, P.W. 5 SI Shyam Babu Mishra, P.W. 6 HCP Kailash Chandra were examined before the trial court. After close of prosecution evidence the statement of the accused-appellant was recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C. Accused claimed that he was falsely implicated in this case. No defence evidence has been adduced. 6. After hearing both the parties, learned trial court convicted and sentenced the accused Hari Kishan under section 376 IPC for 12 years RI and fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine awarded two months additional imprisonment. Aggrieved against the conviction order, this appeal has been preferred. 7. Heard learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the lower court record. 8. We have perused the lower court record along with material exhibits. We find that in this case P.W. 1 Kallu Yadav, father of the victim, P.W. 2 Halima, mother of the victim have been examined, they have fully supported the incident as alleged in the FIR. Further, the prosecutrix aged about six years old has been examined in this case as P.W. 3, she has specifically and categorically narrated the incident. P.W. 1, P.W. 2 and P.W. 3 have been cross examined at length but nothing adverse has come out from their evidence. Further on the basis of cogent, credible and clinching evidence of the fact witnesses, the prosecution case is established and further corroborated by the medical evidence tendered by the P.W. 4 Dr. Anshu Gupta. It is pertinent to mention here that the prosecutrix is a girl child of six years old and the age of accused is 50 years as stated in his statement under section 313 Cr.P.C. P.W. 3 prosecutrix was examined before the trial court where she specifically and categorically narrated the whole incident of sexual assault on her and further P.W. 1 and 2 who are father and mother respectively had supported the prosecution case. There is nothing adverse to disbelieve the credibility of the evidence tendered before the trial court. We would further like to refer the legal preposition with regard to the sexual assault on a girl child. 9. In State of Rajsthan Vs. Om Prakash, 2002 (2) JIC 870 Supreme Court has held that, "there is no force in the contention that if there was any forcible sexual intercourse, it would have resulted in some injuries upon the prosecutrix, presence of injuries are not always a sine qua non to prove a charge of rape. It has to be kept in mind that the case under consideration is one of rape on a girl child aged about 8 years and not a grown up woman". The Hon'ble Supreme Court further held, "child rape cases are cases of perverse lust for sex where even innocent children are not spared in pursuit of the sexual pleasure. It is a crime against humanity. In such cases, responsibility on the shoulders of the courts is more onerous so as to provide proper legal protection to these children. Their physical and mental immobility call for such protection. Children are the natural resource of our country. They are country's future. Hope of tomorrow rests on them. In our country, a girl child is in a very vulnerable position and one of the modes of her exploitation is rape besides other mode of sexual abuse. These factors point towards a different approach required to be adopted. It is necessary for the courts to have a sensitive approach when dealing with cases of child rape. The effect of such a crime on the mind of the child is likely to be lifelong. A special safeguard has been provided for children in the Constitution of India in Article 39." 10. Further in Guddu Urf Raghvendra, Arjun Singh Vs. State of U.P., 2016 ALJ 81 wherein it has been held that, "The offence relating to sexual assault are taken to be very heinous offence. These offence have a great impact on the social status, prestige of the family of the victim as well as it has impact on the dignity, reputation and prestige of the victim. The reputation, psychology, image of the victim is always at jeopardy in the event of victimization of sexual assault in her known circle. These offence have a great impact on the social status, prestige of the family of the victim as well as it has impact on the dignity, reputation and prestige of the victim. The reputation, psychology, image of the victim is always at jeopardy in the event of victimization of sexual assault in her known circle. After such incident normally a mature decision is taken by the family member about lodging of FIR. Some time because of the social prestige and social constraint such offence even go unreported to the police." 11. In the light of the aforesaid discussions, we find that there is no delay in FIR, medical report and FSL report is in consonance with the prosecution version as stated by the fact witnesses including the P.W. 1, 2 and 3 respectively. 12. Keeping the facts, circumstances and above cited legal prepositions, we are of the view that the court below has recorded the findings of conviction and order of sentence after appreciating the evidence and material available on record and after providing the opportunity of hearing to both the parties. The findings recorded by the trial court are reasoned one and based on material available on record. So, we find no option but to confirm the impugned judgement of conviction and sentence. 13. So far as the sentence is concerned, it transpires from the record that Senior Superintendent of Jail, Agra has filed his report dated 23.5.2016 mentioning therein that the accused-appellant Hari Kishan after serving the sentence of 12 years imprisonment and depositing the fine of Rs. 1,000/- imposed on him has already been released from jail on 12.11.2014. 14. Under these facts situation, we find that he need not surrender to serve any sentence as he has already served the sentence as reported by the Jail Authorities. 15. In view of the above observations, this appeal is dismissed. 16. Let a certified copy of the judgement with all original documents be transmitted to the court concerned. 17. We appreciate the assistance of Shri Azhar Husain, Amicus Curiae, appearing on behalf of the appellant. Registry is directed to pay fee to Sri Azhar Husain, Amicus Curiae, as per rules at the earliest.