JUDGMENT Sandeep Mehta, J. - The appellant herein has been convicted and sentenced as below by the learned Sessions Judge, Dungarpur vide the judgment dated 28.9.2012 passed in Sessions Case No.10/2012: Conviction for offence under Sections Sentences Default Sentences 302 I.P.C. Life Imprisonment, with fine of Rs.500/- 15 days' S.I. 376 I.P.C. Life Imprisonment, with fine of Rs.500/- 15 days' S.I. 341 I.P.C. One Month's R.I. All sentences awarded to the accused were ordered to run concurrently. 2. Brief facts relevant and essential for disposal of the appeal are noted hereinbelow. 3. Dhula (P.W.4) lodged a written report (Ex.P5) to the S.H.O. P.S. Dovda, District Dungarpur on 26.10.2011 at about 11 A.M. at the Govt. Hospital, Dungarpur alleging therein that on the previous day, at about 3 P.M. in the afternoon, his daughter aged 4 years, and his niece Mst.P aged 9 years (hereinafter referred to as 'the victim') were returning home after having bath in the river. Vikka S/o Dhanna Ahari Meena resident of their village, stopped the girls on the way and pushed the elder child on the ground and forced himself upon her with the intention of subjecting her to rape. His daughter came running and shouting and told him that Vikka had forced himself on to the victim. Upon this, the informant and Kamla (mother of the victim) ran towards the place of incident. On seeing them, Vikka ran away. The victim was lying unconscious on the ground. She had a large number of injuries on her face, back etc. Her ghaghri (skirt) was hanging on the babool tree. In her unconscious condition, she was taken to the Govt. Hospital Dungarpur for treatment in a private vehicle. On the basis of this report, an F.I.R. No.189/2011 (Ex.P/14) came to be registered at the Police Station Dovda for the offences under Sections 341 and 376 I.P.C. Considering the precarious condition of the victim, she was referred to the Maharana Bhupal Hospital, Udaipur for treatment, where she passed away on 29.10.2011 while undergoing treatment. The dead body was subjected to post mortem at the hands of a Medical Board constituted at the M.B.H. Udaipur, which issued the post-mortem report (Ex.P8) noticing the presence of as many as 13 injuries on the body of the victim. Her labia majora was swollen. The hymen was ruptured. The edges were torn. The dead body was subjected to post mortem at the hands of a Medical Board constituted at the M.B.H. Udaipur, which issued the post-mortem report (Ex.P8) noticing the presence of as many as 13 injuries on the body of the victim. Her labia majora was swollen. The hymen was ruptured. The edges were torn. A laceration was noticed on the vagina and the orifice was also torn. Numerous head injuries were noticed underneath which, the blood was collected. The cause of death was opined to be coma due to the head injury. The Board also opined that the victim had been subjected to sexual assault. The head injuries noticed on the body of the girl were opined to be sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. The accused was arrested. He portrayed himself to be a juvenile and thus, he was initially presented before the Juvenile Justice Board concerned. However, the Investigating Officer collected the school certificate (Ex.P17) from the Govt. Upper Primary School Sablana, Panchayat Samiti Dungarpur where, the accused was initially admitted, as per which, the date of birth of the accused, while being admitted in the school, was recorded as 5.8.1993. In context to this school entry, the accused was found to be a major. The Investigating Officer carried out the usual steps of investigation and proceeded to file a charge-sheet against the accused for the offences under Sections 341, 376 and 302 I.P.C. 4. As the offences under Sections 376 and 302 I.P.C. were exclusively triable by the Sessions Court, the case was committed to the court of the Sessions Judge, Dungarpur for trial, who framed charges against the accused in the above terms. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution examined as many as 14 witnesses and got exhibited 18 documents to prove its case. Upon being questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and when confronted with the circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution evidence, the accused denied the same and claimed to have been falsely implicated but did not choose to lead any evidence in defence. After hearing the arguments advanced by the defence and the prosecution and upon appreciating the evidence available on record, the learned trial court proceeded to convict and sentence the appellant as above. Hence, this appeal. 5. After hearing the arguments advanced by the defence and the prosecution and upon appreciating the evidence available on record, the learned trial court proceeded to convict and sentence the appellant as above. Hence, this appeal. 5. Learned counsel Shri Shambhoo Singh Rathore representing the appellant vehemently and fervently urged that the entire prosecution case is false and fabricated. The most important witness i.e. the child 'P', who allegedly saw the initial part of the incident and then went and informed her father Dhula, the first informant, was not examined in evidence. The evidence of Kamla (P.W.3) being the mother of the deceased, is highly contradictory and vacillating. She admitted that she ran towards the direction where her daughter had reportedly been caught by the accused. However, she was unable to find the victim and became unconscious. Thus, as per learned counsel Shri Rathore, there was no possibility of this witness having seen the incident with her own eyes. He further submitted that the F.I.R. was lodged after a significant delay of nearly 20 hours. Regarding the evidence of Dhula (P.W.4), the contention of Shri Rathore was that the presence of this witness at the scene of the occurrence, is unlikely because despite having claimed to have seen the accused assaulting the victim, he did not take any steps to save her. As per Shri Rathore, the time which must have been spent for arrival of this witness at the scene of incident after being informed by his daughter 'P' that the accused was assaulting the victim, was quite significant and the accused would not have waited at the spot for this long duration. Thus, as per Shri Rathore, there is no possibility of the accused having been seen while he was assaulting the victim. Shri Rathore further urged that as per the medical jurist Dr.Anupam Johari, no fractures were seen underneath the head injury of the deceased and as such, it cannot be concluded with any degree of certainty that the accused intended to cause death of the victim. He thus urged that the charge under Section 302 I.P.C. is not substantiated from the highest allegations of the prosecution. Shri Rathore also submitted that the accused was a juvenile on the date of the incident and was presented before the Juvenile Justice Board and thus, trial of the accused conducted by the Sessions Judge is vitiated. He thus urged that the charge under Section 302 I.P.C. is not substantiated from the highest allegations of the prosecution. Shri Rathore also submitted that the accused was a juvenile on the date of the incident and was presented before the Juvenile Justice Board and thus, trial of the accused conducted by the Sessions Judge is vitiated. On these grounds, he implored the court to accept the appeal, set aside the impugned judgment and acquit the accused of the charges. 6. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the appellant's counsel. He contended that the accused acted in a demonic manner while sexually assaulting the victim aged 9 years. The ghastly and heinous manner in which the accused forced himself on the victim causing her no less than 13 injuries and brutalizing her private parts, is depictive of his depraved behaviour. He contended that the witnesses Kamla (P.W.3) and Dhula (P.W.4) categorically stated that they saw the accused Vipin forcing himself on to the minor victim. They could not be shaken in their crossexamination. Large number of injuries which were inflicted to the victim during the incident corroborate the prosecution allegations that the assault must have continued for quite a long time. Thus, learned Public Prosecutor implored the Court to affirm the impugned judgment of conviction. 7. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced at the Bar and have gone through the impugned judgment and have minutely reappreciated the entire evidence available on record. 8. The first submission of Shri Rathore that the prosecution case should be thrown out as the star witness Mst.'P' was not examined in evidence is noted just to be discarded for the simple reason that she was a child aged 4 years. The child of course had made her parents aware of the assault which was being perpetrated on her cousin but she being a tender aged child of 4 years, could not be expected to be composed enough so as to give evidence in a criminal trial. Thus, non-examination of the child Payal in evidence cannot be considered as adversely affecting the prosecution case. Thus, non-examination of the child Payal in evidence cannot be considered as adversely affecting the prosecution case. Smt.Kamla (P.W.3) as well as Dhula (P.W.4), who gave affirmative evidence on oath stating that Payal came rushing to them and told them that while she and the victim were returning after taking bath in river, Vikka accosted them that he had caught hold of the victim. Obviously the child was not mature enough to state anything beyond this. Smt.Kamla and Dhula immediately rushed towards the place of incident on coming to know that the victim had been caught by the accused. Kamla reached there first and saw the accused forcing himself on to the victim. The victim's skirt had been taken off and was lying on the bushes. The victim was so brutally assaulted that she became unconscious. The victim was taken to the hospital for treatment. She was bleeding from the vaginal area. Nothing significant was elicited in the cross-examination of both the witnesses which can discredit their evidentiary worth. Shri Rathore tried to buttress that Kamla admitted that she became unconscious when she did not see her daughter and thus, her claim that she saw the accused forcing himself on the victim has to be disbelieved. However, we have to remain conscious of the fact that the witness is an illiterate tribal lady. She appended her thumb impression on the statement. Dhula (P.W.4) explained the circumstances and stated that the averment that Kamla became unconscious was intended to convey that she panicked on seeing the incident. Manifestly, this explanation is thoroughly convincing. In this background, we have no hesitation in holding that the evidence of P.W.3 Kamla and P.W.4 Dhula is thoroughly convincing and establishes beyond all manner of doubt that the accused brutally assaulted the victim sexually and subjected her to physical violence as well in his draconic act. As per the evidence of Dr.Anupam Johari (P.W.9), the victim was admitted in the children ward and thereafter, the neuro surgery ward of the M.B.H. Udaipur where, she was provided treatment. However, she could not survive and passed away on 29.10.2011. We have already noticed the extent of injuries caused to the victim. Her private parts were lacerated and torn apart. Number of head injuries were caused to the victim underneath which, blood had collected. The brain was damaged. The effusion of blood in the brain proved fatal. However, she could not survive and passed away on 29.10.2011. We have already noticed the extent of injuries caused to the victim. Her private parts were lacerated and torn apart. Number of head injuries were caused to the victim underneath which, blood had collected. The brain was damaged. The effusion of blood in the brain proved fatal. Thus, we are of the firm opinion that while subjecting the victim to sexual assault, the accused also assaulted her brutally and caused her a large number of injuries. The manner in which the victim was brutalized assaulted is depictive of the demonic and depraved attitude of the accused and there can be no hesitation for this Court to hold that by acting in this manner, the accused wanted to ensure that the victim did not survive after the sexual assault. The Investigating Officer P.W.15 Shri Kailash Soni proved the requisite steps of investigation undertaken by him during investigation. As per the charge-sheet, initially the accused, who posed himself to be a juvenile, was presented before the Juvenile Justice Board. However, the Investigating Officer collected the school certificate of the accused (Ex.P17) from the Principal of the Govt. Upper Primary School, Sablana wherein the date of birth the accused is recorded as 5.8.1993. The accused did not question this entry during trial. The said entry of age made in the school register is conclusive for deciding the age of the accused on the date of the incident. In reference to the said date of birth, the accused was well above 18 years at the time of the incident i.e. 25.10.2011. Thus, the plea of juvenility of the appellant as on the date of incident, raised by Shri Rathore has no merit whatsoever. 9. As a result of the above discussion, we are of the firm opinion that the learned trial court committed no error; factual or legal whatsoever while appreciating the evidence and recording the finding of guilt against the accused in the manner stated above. 10. Shri Rathore pleaded that the accused deserves sympathetic consideration on the aspect of the sentences but since we have already held that the charge under Section 302 I.P.C. is well and truly established against the accused, there is no scope of reduction of the sentence of life imprisonment awarded to him. 11. We thus find no merit in the appeal which is hereby rejected. 12. 11. We thus find no merit in the appeal which is hereby rejected. 12. The matter is referred to the District Legal Services Authority, Dungarpur for grant of compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased under the Rajasthan Victim Compensation Scheme at the present rates fixed in the Schedule. 13. The record of the trial court be sent back forthwith.