ORDER :

The appellant herein was charged for the commission of offence under Sections 363, 366, 376 and 306 of the I.P.C. in FIR 236 dated 6.11.2004 which was registered at Police Station Agroha, Hisar (Haryana). He was tried for the aforesaid offence and convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar, vide his judgment dated 4.9.2009. It was followed by the order of sentence dated 5.9.2009. Insofar as offence under Section 363 IPC is concerned, the appellant was given sentence of R.I. for three years and fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default of payment of fine, R.I. for another one month. In respect of offence under Section 366 of IPC, the appellant was awarded sentence of five years R.I. and fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine further R.I. for two months. For commission of offence under Section 376 IPC R.I. for 10 years with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine R.I. for two months was awarded. Likewise for sentence under Section 306 IPC he was given R.I. for five years and fine of Rs. 5.000/- and in default of payment of fine R.I. for two months was given. All these sentences were to run concurrently.

2. The appellant challenged the aforesaid conviction and sentence by filing the appeal before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana. By the impugned judgment dated 19.8.2013, the High Court has maintained the conviction and sentence in respect of offences under Sections 306, 366 and 376 but set aside the conviction recorded under Section 306 IPC. Not satisfied with this outcome, present appeal is preferred, via special leave petition in which leave had been granted.

3. The case set up by the prosecution, in brief, is that: the daughter of Phool Singh (hereinafter referred to as 'the prosecutrix') was missing from the house and because of this reason Phool Singh lodged a missing report to the Police at 7.00 p.m. on 5.11.2004. He stated the age of prosecutrix is 15-16 years. It was stated by him that after dinner the prosecutrix slept in the house and during night between 1.00 a.m. to 4.00 a.m., she left the house on her own and the gold ornaments and cash were not touched. According to him he had tried to trace her but when he was unable to find, he was lodging the missing report. He further did not suspect any one. It was followed by another statement by the complainant after some time, wherein he stated that the prosecutrix had gone to 'Nohra' to fetch milk at 4.30 a.m. and had not returned and he along with his family members had been searching for her. As they were unable to trace her, missing report was lodged.

4. After recording the said missing report, the police officials along with Krishan Kumar and Dhan Singh, both of them were related to the complainant, went to Hisar in search of the prosecutrix. On the next date at 4.30 p.m. when they were at the bus stand, Krishan Kumar and Dhan Singh saw the prosecutrix. She was in the company of another boy, viz. Om Prakash who was holding her hand and after seeing them the said boy fled away. The prosecutrix was rescued.

5. Her statement was recorded by the police on the same day i.e. 6.11.2004. In this statement, pertinently, she narrated the incident by explaining that when she had gone to 'Nohra' for milching the buffaloes, Om Prakash, who is the neighbour of the prosecutrix, came there and caught hold of her and put his hand on her mouth and threatened that in case she would raise any noise he would kill her. He then took her away to the fields of cotton and enticed her by telling that he would marry her and would keep her in a big city. Thereupon, he committed rape of the prosecutrix against her wishes. She further stated that then Rajender friend of Om Prakash came there on his motor cycle. Om Prakash asked him to stay there saying that he would come back after some time after taking care of his fields. Rajender, by giving threat of defaming the prosecutrix, also raped her. She was kept in the field of cotton for the whole day. In the night at abo