Judgment : (Arvind Kumar Verma, J.) 1. The appellant has filed the instant appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure , 1973, (henceforth ‘the Cr.P.C.') questioning the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 04.09.2021 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Second Fast Track Special Court), Bilaspur (C.G.), in Special Criminal Case (POCSO Act) No.08/2019, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under :- Conviction Sentence In Default Under Section 342 of the Indian Penal Code R.I. for 01 year and fine amount of Rs.1,000/- In default of payment of fine amount further imprisonment for one month Under Section 376 ?? /511 of the Indian Penal Code R.I. for 10 years and fine amount of Rs.4,000/- In default of payment of fine amount further imprisonment for 06 months (both the sentences have been directed to be run concurrently) 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that on 11/11/2018, the complainant/informant- uncle of the victim submitted a written complaint to the effect that on 11/11/2018 at about 01:00 pm, Chaiti Bai told him that her niece- victim and another victim had entered the house of appellant- Panbudi Sahu at 12:00 pm and were inside the room till about 12:30 pm. Then those people called the victim and another victim and asked them why they had called Panbudi. The victim and another victim told that they were playing near a peepal tree and Panbudi said that he would give them money and took them inside the room of his house and locked the room. Thereafter, he pulled down the leggings and underwear of another victim and tried to do wrong act with them. Appellant gave Rs.5-5/-to both of them and asked them not to tell anyone and threw them out of the house. While interrogating the victim and another victim, Kejha Sahu, Lakhan Sahu, Dharamdas Manikpuri of the village were present, the father of another victim was also present there. When Panbudi (Mukhiram) was asked why did you do this, he folded his hands and said it was a mistake. On the basis of said complaint, police registered a crime against the accused-appellant under Sections 376, 511, 342 of the Code and Section 8 of the Protection Act . 3. Statements of witnesses were recorded in the case. The accused was arrested after taking action of seizure etc. On the basis of said complaint, police registered a crime against the accused-appellant under Sections 376, 511, 342 of the Code and Section 8 of the Protection Act . 3. Statements of witnesses were recorded in the case. The accused was arrested after taking action of seizure etc. Thereafter, after completion of investigation, the accused was found guilty under Sections 376, 511, 342 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Section 4 of the Protection of Children Act and the charge-sheet was filed in the Court for trial on 15/01/2019. 4. In order to prove the charges against the appellant (accused), prosecution examined as many as 17 witnesses. Statement of appellant was also recorded under Section 313 of CrPC in which he pleaded innocence and false implication. However, no defence witness was examined by the appellant. 5. After appreciation of evidence available on record, learned trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned in paragraph one of this appeal. Hence, this appeal. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the learned trial Court has wrongly been convicted the appellant without any sufficient and clinching evidence available on record against the appellant. He further contended that the conclusion given by the learned trial Court in its conclusions in paragraphs 32 to 35 is against the established principle of law because medical examination and chemical test are conducted only to corroborate the truth of the incident which is told on the basis of oral evidence, that is why according to Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, provision for medical and chemical test has been made, if the oral evidence of the victim is not confirmed in the said test, then it becomes unreliable. It is further contended that there is no injury was found inside or outside on the body of the victim nor was there any evidence of human semen falling. In such circumstances, there was no evidence of rape of the victim, hence, the punishment given to him under Section 376AB/511 is baseless and is liable to be cancelled. He further contended that the prosecution failed to adduce any cogent and reliable piece of evidence to prove the guilt of appellant. Without there being any sufficient, cogent and clinching evidence/material available on record, therefore, conviction of appellant is not sustainable. Thus, the appellant is entitled for acquittal. 7. He further contended that the prosecution failed to adduce any cogent and reliable piece of evidence to prove the guilt of appellant. Without there being any sufficient, cogent and clinching evidence/material available on record, therefore, conviction of appellant is not sustainable. Thus, the appellant is entitled for acquittal. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant and submits that at the time of incident, age of the victim was about 07 years 10 months and the act committed by the appellant-accused is serious in nature. He further contended that there is no illegality or infirmity in the finding recorded by the learned trial Court and the impugned judgment of the trial Court needs no interference and the appellant is not entitled to get acquittal. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the impugned judgment passed by the trial Court as well as other material available on record, with utmost circumspection. 9. Uncle of the victim (PW-1) has stated in his Court statement that at the time of incident, victim’s age was 07 years. 10-11 months ago, his neighbor Chaiti Bai told him that his niece was inside Panbudi's house for about half an hour, go and ask why she had gone there, at the same time at 12.00-12.30 pm his niece/victim came home, then he asked her, she told that she and her friend were playing under the tree, then Panbudi took them inside his house saying that he will give them money and tried to do obscene acts with them by removing their undergarments and also gave five rupees each to her and her friend saying not to tell anyone. His niece/victim also told that she and her friend were crying saying open the door, but Panbudi was not opening the door. When his niece/victim was telling us about the incident, Sanjay Pal, Dharamdas Manikpuri, Lakhan Sahu, Kejha Sahu, Keshav Sahu and the Kotwar of the village were also present there. After knowing about the said incident, Panbudi was called to his house and the other persons present there and they asked him why he did this, then he said that it was a mistake, do whatever you want to do. 10. Elder mother of the victim (PW-2) has stated in her Court statement that at the time of incident, victim was 08 years old. 10. Elder mother of the victim (PW-2) has stated in her Court statement that at the time of incident, victim was 08 years old. The incident happened a year ago. When she returned from the field in the evening, one Ajay told her that he had taken her daughter/victim and her brother-in-law's daughter to his house and did wrong act with them. Ajay Sahu also told her that the accused gave Rs.5 each to her daughter and brother-in-law's daughter and told them not to tell anyone that he had done a wrong act. 11. Victim (PW-3) stated in her Court statement that she and her daughter of elder mother were playing near the Peepal tree in the afternoon when Panbudi came there and said that he will give money and he pulled both of them and locked them inside his house. Then Panbudi pulled their underwear down and was touching their body. The appellant even touch their private part. 12. Dr. Parul Jogi (PW-13) who examined the victim deposed that on general examination of the victim, she found that the victim’s respiratory and cardiovascular system were normal and secondary sexual characteristics were underdeveloped. The age of the victim was about 07 years. On internal examination, she found that the external genitals of the victim were normal. On examination, there was no redness or pain in the labia majora and minora. The hymen was intact and there was no injury. It was not possible to insert a finger into the private parts of the victim. Two slides were made from the labia minora of the victim and were sealed. The skin coloured leggings were brought for testing in which three semen like stains were found which were marked in blue colour, sealed for chemical examination. She opined that no opinion can be given on the issue of consensual intercourse. The victim was sent to the senior Gynecologist of the District Hospital, Bilaspur for expert opinion. The test report given by her is Ex.P-15. 13. So far as age of the victim being 07 years and 10 months years at the time of alleged occurrence is concerned, there is no dispute regarding the same. Moreover, prosecution has examined PW-10-Sanjeet Raj Bhanu- Incharge Head Master, who submitted Dhakil Kharij Register (Article-A) in which date of birth of the victim has been shown as 01.01.2011. 13. So far as age of the victim being 07 years and 10 months years at the time of alleged occurrence is concerned, there is no dispute regarding the same. Moreover, prosecution has examined PW-10-Sanjeet Raj Bhanu- Incharge Head Master, who submitted Dhakil Kharij Register (Article-A) in which date of birth of the victim has been shown as 01.01.2011. Therefore, it is conclusively proved on record, that age of prosecutrix was 07 years, 10 months on 11.11.2018, i.e., the date of occurrence in this case. 14. In the given factual matrix, statement of the victim is extremely material and relevant. In the present case, the victim is a child of tender age. The child was found to be a competent witness. Learned Court below, while recording statement of victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C., after putting relevant questions to her, found that the victim had basic understanding and was competent to record the statement. Learned trial Court has also found the victim to be a competent witness having proper understanding of the facts and circumstances. 15. The prosecution has successfully proved its case against the appellant. It bears reiteration that the victim has given a steadfast, consistent and categoric narration of the facts as they unfolded. Statement of the victim who was found to be a competent witness along with the corroborating medical evidence clearly proves the prosecution case against the appellant. I have carefully scrutinized the entire evidence including the medical record and the evidence of the witnesses. 16. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, evidence of the victim (PW-3) who has specifically stated the role of the appellant, evidence of her uncle (PW-01), her elder mother (PW- 02). Further considering the Medical Report of the victim (Ex.P- 15) and other material available on record, I am of the considered opinion that the learned trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant for offence punishable under Sections 342 and 376 ?? /511 of the IPC . I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the findings recorded by the trial Court with regard to the conviction part. Ordered accordingly. 17. In view of above discussion, this Court comes to the conclusion that the prosecution has succeeded in proving its case beyond all reasonable doubts against the appellant. The conviction and sentence as awarded by the trial Court to the appellant is hereby affirmed/maintained. 18. Ordered accordingly. 17. In view of above discussion, this Court comes to the conclusion that the prosecution has succeeded in proving its case beyond all reasonable doubts against the appellant. The conviction and sentence as awarded by the trial Court to the appellant is hereby affirmed/maintained. 18. The present criminal appeal lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed and stands disposed of.