JUDGMENT : Heard, learned Amicus Curiae and learned A.P.P. for the State 2. Sole appellant stands convicted for the offence of rape under Section 376(2) (f) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 (Ten) years with a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default whereof, to suffer further simple imprisonment for three months by the impugned judgment dated 29.01.2013 and order of sentence dated 31.01.2013, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa, in Sessions Trial No.101 of 2009. 3. On the basis of fardbeyan of the informant and father of the victim, Police has registered Manjhgaon P.S. case No.05 of 2009 dated 03.02.2009 under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code against the sole accused/appellant. The fardbeyan of the informant (Chaitanya Pingua) and father of the victim girl ('X') recorded by the Sub Inspector of Police and Officer-In-Charge, Ramesh Kumar, Manjhgaon P.S. at 15.00 Hrs. on 3rd February, 2009, inter-alia alleged as follows :-That on 02.02.2009 at around 5.30 in the evening, daughter of the informant aged 5 years old named ‘X’ came crying to the house and narrated that while she had gone near Tungri in the village for grazing their Oxen, the accused, Mankirai Boipai, son of Mohan Singh Boipai, resident of village-Tarapai, Tola-Hurdubsai, P.S.-Manjhgaon committed rape upon her. The informant found blood oozing out of her private parts after removing the clothes. The informant discussed the matter with his wife and since it was night by that time could not inform the Village Munda about the incidence. On 03.02.2009, in the morning he informed the Village Munda who advised him to go to the Police Station. Based on these allegations it has been asserted that accused, Mankirai Boipai committed rape upon his five years' old daughter named 'X'. 4. Investigation led to filing of charge sheet under the provisions of Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code against sole accused vide charge sheet no.6 of 2009 dated 28.02.2009. 5. Cognizance of the offence has been taken and thereafter the case has been committed to the Court of Sessions. Charges were framed under Section 376(2)(f) on 1st July, 2009, read and explained over to the accused in Hindi, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Thus, the accused was put up for trial. 6. During the course of prosecution examined nine prosecution witnesses. Charges were framed under Section 376(2)(f) on 1st July, 2009, read and explained over to the accused in Hindi, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Thus, the accused was put up for trial. 6. During the course of prosecution examined nine prosecution witnesses. Budhni Kui, wife of the informant and Mother of the victim, P.W.1, Chaitanya Pingua, informant and father of the victim, P.W.2, Budhadeo Pingua -P.W.3, Subhram Pingua -P.W.4, victim girl -P.W.5, Biran Pingua -P.W.6, Madho Pingua-P.W.7, Lal Muni Ram, Investigating Officer -P.W.8 and Dr. Neeru Jha, Medical Officer as P.W.9. 7. The following exhibits were adduced by the prosecution during the course of trial. Signature of Budhdeo Pingua (P.W.3) on fardbeyan as Exhibit-1, signature of Budhdeo (P.W.3) Pingua on production-cum-seizure list as Exhibit-2, formal F.I.R. as Exhibit-3, Fardbeyan as Exhibit-4, production-cum-seizure list as Exhibit-5, Medical Report as Exhibit-6 and F.S.L. reports as Exhibits-7 and 7/1. The informant was examined as P.W.2 and the victim girl-'X' was examined as P.W.5 after certification by the learned trial Court that all the formalities had been followed and the witness is competent to depose as child witness. P.W.9 is the doctor, who has proved the injury report, which is marked as Exhibit-6. She was part of Medical Board which examined the victim girl 'X' on 04.02.2009 at 12.15 Hrs. with written consent and LTI of her father (P.W.2). The victim girl was brought and identified by the police constable (Dudnath Singh Yadav) of Manjhgaon P.S. and her father as well. After conclusion of the evidence of the prosecution, the material evidence were put to the accused, while recording his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., to which he pleaded innocence and stated in answer to question no.3. that he had been implicated in respect of the land. Upon consideration of the material evidence on record and the submission of the learned A.P.P. for the State and the defence, the finding of the conviction was recorded by the learned trial Court, as according to it prosecution had been able to prove the charges beyond shadow of all reasonable doubt as against the accused. 8. Upon consideration of the material evidence on record and the submission of the learned A.P.P. for the State and the defence, the finding of the conviction was recorded by the learned trial Court, as according to it prosecution had been able to prove the charges beyond shadow of all reasonable doubt as against the accused. 8. Learned Amicus Curiae has questioned the finding of conviction inter-alia on the following grounds:- He submits that the child (‘X’) was aged 6 to 7 years at that time of her medical examination on 04.02.2009, as per the opinion of the Medical Board deposed through P.W.9. Her statement at paragraph-4 of her cross-examination has been specifically referred to discredit her credibility as a trustworthy witness, where she has categorically stated that her father had instructed her to say whatever she had said during her deposition. As such, she was a tutored witness. Apart from her, there was no eye witness to the occurrence, as per case of the prosecution. As per the statement of the informant (P.W.2), the girl after return to her house had narrated the incidence allegedly committed by the sole accused, Mankirai Boipai and as such, he was not an eye witness to the occurrence. Therefore, conviction of the appellant is not based on cogent, consistent and reliable evidence. The prosecution has failed to connect the appellant with the alleged occurrence altogether. As such, he is entitled to the benefit of doubt. The impugned judgment deserves to be set aside. The appellant has remained in custody almost for the entire period of his sentence till date since the date of institution of the F.I.R. i.e. 03.02.2009. 9. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor supported the findings recorded by the learned Trial Court. He submits that there is no reason to doubt the testimony of the child witness. She has been found to be a competent witness by the learned Trial Court before recording her evidence. Defence has not been able to discredit her on any account. She had no reason or motive to name the accused as the perpetrator of the crime. The story put up by the prosecution has been duly corroborated by the medical evidence as well. In the opinion of the Doctor forceful penetration of vagina has been tried. The victim was approximately 6-7 years old. She had no reason or motive to name the accused as the perpetrator of the crime. The story put up by the prosecution has been duly corroborated by the medical evidence as well. In the opinion of the Doctor forceful penetration of vagina has been tried. The victim was approximately 6-7 years old. On account of her tender age also, she was not in a position to offer any resistance against an assault committed by the accused who was a grown up man, aged about 21 years. As such, absence of mark of violence does not create a doubt about the serious sexual assault committed by the accused. The prosecution has seized the yellowish colour green chaddi of the victim girl, having blood-stain and sent it for examination by the Forensic Science Laboratory. The report of the F.S.L. has been proved and marked as Exhibit-7 and 7/1 without any objection which disclose human blood found on the chaddi of the victim. The entire incriminating materials proved by the prosecution during trial, therefore, do not leave any room of doubt as to the commission of such a heinous offence upon a minor child of 6-7 years by this appellant. The findings recorded by the learned trial court are well-considered, on proper appreciation of the material evidence on record. Therefore, they do not deserve to be interfered in the appeal. The appeal is fit to be dismissed. 10. We have considered submissions of the learned Amicus Curiae, learned A.P.P., gone through the entire material evidence on record and also perused the impugned judgment. The prosecution had adduced nine witnesses in support of their case of which material witnesses Nos.2, 5 and 9, the Doctor are the prime witnesses whose testimony taken together along with the deposition of P.W.1 (mother) would be sufficient to test whether the prosecution case has been proved beyond shadow of all reasonable doubt against the sole accused/appellant. We find from the testimony of P.W.1 (mother) also read in conjunction with the statement of P.W.2 (father and informant) that the occurrence was reported by the girl (P.W.5) immediately on her return from the field where she had gone to graze cattle. She had specifically named this accused as having committed rape upon her. We find from the testimony of P.W.1 (mother) also read in conjunction with the statement of P.W.2 (father and informant) that the occurrence was reported by the girl (P.W.5) immediately on her return from the field where she had gone to graze cattle. She had specifically named this accused as having committed rape upon her. The matter was discussed between spouses i.e. P.W.1 (mother) and P.W.2 (father), but since it was late in the evening, it could not be reported to the Village Munda. On next morning, they approached the Village Munda who advised them to go to the Police Station and institute a case. As such, there was no deliberate delay on the part of the informant in reporting the incidence. Minor delay, if any, has been well-explained. We also find that the girl was sent for medical examination after institution of the F.I.R. She was examined by the Medical Board constituted by the Acting Deputy Superintendent which comprises of three doctors, Dr. Sukhmati Banra, Dr. Neeru Jha (P.W.9) and Dr. B. K. Sahni on 4th February, 2009 at 12.15 hours. During the course of her medical examination, the Medical Board found the following features of her physical appearance/ growth apart from the injuries on her private parts. The medical report which has been proved by the Doctor (P.W.9) and marked as Exhibit-6, is as under :- “Brought & Identified-(1) Police Constable Dudnath Singh Yadav No.781, Thana Manjhgaon and her father Chaitan Pingua. Identification Marks -(1) One Black til on Medial aspect of the Rt. Shoulder joint (2) One black til on Rt. Side of the lower lip. Menstural History – Menarche not started. G/E – Complexion – Dark, Body Built – thin, teeth UJ/ LJ 12/12, Ht. 114.5 cm, wt. 16 kg. Breast – not developed. Hairs -Both axillary and pubic hairs absent. MIV – No MIV on body found. P/V Examination – O/E (1) Dried up semen like fluid & Blood staining around the vaginal orifice externally. (2) Labia minora & labia majora oedematous & tender. (3) Hymen ruptured, remnants of hymenal tag swollen, oedematous bleeded on touch. (4) Lacerated wound on the posterior fourchette, Bleeded on touch, size 1”x 1/4”x 1/4” deep. (5) Lacerated wound on antero-lateral aspect of the left side of labia minora and on outer parts of the vagina, bleeded on touch. (2) Labia minora & labia majora oedematous & tender. (3) Hymen ruptured, remnants of hymenal tag swollen, oedematous bleeded on touch. (4) Lacerated wound on the posterior fourchette, Bleeded on touch, size 1”x 1/4”x 1/4” deep. (5) Lacerated wound on antero-lateral aspect of the left side of labia minora and on outer parts of the vagina, bleeded on touch. Size 1/2”x1/4” (6) Lacerated wound postero-lateral aspect on right side of outer vaginal wall and lebia minora, Bleeded on touch, size 1/2”x1/4”x 1/4” (7) All the margins of the lacerated wound are ragged, oedematous, tender & bleeded on touch. (8) Blood and semen like fluid stained undergarment cloth was handedover the carrying police Constable name Dudnath Singh Yadav, No.781, Thana Manjhgaon. Swab examination report : No dead or alive spermatozoa found. X-ray Examination report done at Dianostic Centre, Sadar Hospital Chaibasa:- (1) Epiphysis around the elbow joint not fused. (2) Epiphysis of lower end of radius & ulna not fused. (3) Ossification Centre of seven carpal bones appeared & ossified. (4) Epiphysis of the iliac crest not united with their respective shaft, Femur-Epiphysis of the head of the femur is not united with their respective shaft. Opinion -(1) Forceful penetration of the vagina has been tried. (2) She is app. 6-7 years of age.” A mere perusal of the injuries on the private parts of the girl substantiate the allegations made by the informant through the fardbeyan duly supported in their oral examination during trial through P.W.2 and P.W.5, the victim girl. In the opinion of the Medical Board forceful penetration of vagina has been tried. It is quite natural that a girl of 6-7 years of age could not have offered any resistance in the face of a serious assault by a grown up man of about 21 years at the time of occurrence. The blood-stained undergarment (Chaddi) seized by the Police were also sent for Forensic Examination. The reports of the F.S.L. have been proved as Exhibits-7 and 7/1 which shows presence of human blood on it. The sexual assault on a victim girl of tender age has been duly proved by the medical evidence. Ordinarily commission of such acts of rape are done in lonely places where it is unwise to expect corroboration by any other direct evidence. The victim of rape is not considered as an accomplice to the crime. The sexual assault on a victim girl of tender age has been duly proved by the medical evidence. Ordinarily commission of such acts of rape are done in lonely places where it is unwise to expect corroboration by any other direct evidence. The victim of rape is not considered as an accomplice to the crime. As such, even the sole testimony of the victim girl or woman i.e. the prosecutrix is treated to be sufficient for recording conviction in case the testimony is otherwise trustworthy and reliable. Reliance is placed upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Rajasthan vs. Om Prakash, reported in 2002 (5) SCC 745 specially at paras 13, 14 and 19 extracted blow :- "13. The conviction for offence under Section 376 IPC can be based on the sole testimony of a rape victim is a well settled proposition. In State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh, referring to State of Maharashtra v. Chandraprakash Kewal Chand Jain this Court held that it must not be overlooked that a woman or a girl subjected to sexual assault is not an accomplice to the crime but is a victim of another person's lust and it is improper and undesirable to test her evidence with a certain amount of suspicion, treating her as if she were an accomplice. It has also been observed in the said decision by Dr. Justice A.S. Anand (as His Lordship then was), speaking for the court that the inherent bashfulness of the females and the tendency to conceal outrage of sexual aggression are factors which the courts should not overlook. The testimony of the victim in such cases is vital and unless there are compelling reasons which necessitate looking for corroboration of her statement, the courts should find no difficulty to act on the testimony of a victim of sexual assault alone to convict an accused where her testimony inspires confidence and is found to be reliable. Seeking corroboration of her statement before relying upon the same, as a rule, in such cases amounts to adding insult to injury. 14. In State of H.P. v. Gian Chand Justice Lahoti speaking for the Bench observed that the Court has first to assess the trustworthy intention of the evidence adduced and available on record. Seeking corroboration of her statement before relying upon the same, as a rule, in such cases amounts to adding insult to injury. 14. In State of H.P. v. Gian Chand Justice Lahoti speaking for the Bench observed that the Court has first to assess the trustworthy intention of the evidence adduced and available on record. If the court finds the evidence adduced worthy of being relied on, then the testimony has to be accepted and acted on though there may be other witnesses available who could have been examined but were not examined. 19. Child rape cases are cases of perverse lust for sex where even innocent children are not spared in pursuit of the sexual pleasure. There cannot be anything more obscene than this. It is a crime against humanity. Many such cases are not even brought to light because of social stigma attached thereto. According to some surveys, there has been steep rise in the child rape cases. Children need special care and protection. 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. The overturning of a well considered and well analyzed judgment of the trial court on the grounds like non-examination of other witnesses, when the case against the respondent otherwise stood established beyond any reasonable doubt was not called for. The minor contradiction of recovery of one or two underwear was wholly insignificant.” 11. We do not find that the defence has been able to dent the testimony of the victim girl (P.W.5) in particular or her parents i.e. P.W.1 and P.W.2 so far as the involvement of this accused/appellant in the commission of the offence is concerned. We cannot lose sight of the fact that the girl was 6-7 years of age, at the time of occurrence and could not have any understanding of the nature of the crime unfortunately perpetrated on her. We cannot lose sight of the fact that the girl was 6-7 years of age, at the time of occurrence and could not have any understanding of the nature of the crime unfortunately perpetrated on her. In such light her statement made a Para-4 of the cross-examination has to be considered. Her statements read in entirety do not create any doubt about her trustworthiness or that she was not competent enough to narrate the incidence during trial. [See Rajkumar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, reported in (2014) 5 SCC 353 , Paras 18 and 19]. Taken in totality, we find that the prosecution had been able to prove all the ingredients of the offence under Section 376(2)(f) of the I.P.C. and the involvement of this accused in the commission of the crime beyond shadow of all reasonable doubt. The statements of the material prosecution witnesses are embedded and leave no room for doubt. As such, upon re-appreciation of the entire evidence on record and upon consideration of the submissions of the learned amicus curiae and the learned A.P.P. for the State, we do not find any ground whatsoever to interfere in the findings of the learned Trial Court. The appeal is devoid of merit and accordingly it is dismissed. While parting, this Court records its appreciation to the valuable assistance accorded by the learned Amicus Curiae during hearing of this case. The Member Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee shall bear the fee/legal remuneration of the learned Amicus Curiae.