The prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and any reasonable doubt benefits the accused, leading to acquittal in the absence of credible evidence.

JUDGMENT :

Surya Kant, J.

1. The instant criminal appeal is directed against the impugned judgment dated 01.03.2012 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, whereby the criminal appeal preferred by the respondent had been allowed. The High Court, while acquitting him under Sections 376 and 452 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, the “IPC”), has set aside the judgment and order of the Trial Court dated 02.01.2009, holding the respondent guilty of the aforementioned offences with a sentence of 10 years of rigorous imprisonment.

2. We have heard learned counsel for the State at a considerable length. The record has been perused.

3. The prosecution case is that on 13.08.2007, the prosecutrix (PW-10) through her father lodged FIR No. 346/2007 under Sections 452 and 376 of IPC at Police Station Sadar Hamirpur against the accused-respondent. It was alleged therein that when her parents (PW-8 & PW-9) had gone to the hospital for purchasing medicines around noon, the respondent came to the varandah of her house and asked for a match box. Finding her alone, the accused allegedly caught her from the arm and took her inside the room. Thereafter, he forcibly committed sexually intercourse with her. This incident was apparently narrated by the prosecutrix to her parents when they returned, who subsequently lodged the FIR.

4. The prosecutrix was medically examined by Dr. Sunita Galodha (PW-7) at Regional Hospital, Hamirpur, where she was found to be of unsound mind as she did not cooperate in her medical examination. As the factum of sexual intercourse could not be ascertained, the prosecutrix was further referred to the RPMC Hospital at Tanda (Dharamshala) for the opinion of their Gynecologist and Psychiatrist. However, the father of the prosecutrix did not allow for any medical examination to happen. Nevertheless, the initial vaginal swab collected by the police was sent to Forensic Science Laboratory for medical analysis.

5. The Trial Court on the basis of examination of prosecution evidence, consisting of 14 witnesses besides statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, convicted him under Sections 452 and 376 of IPC; and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years, besides the requisite fine.

6. Against this, the respondent preferred an appeal before the High Court, which has been allowed vide the impugned judgment. The High Court has succinctly demonstrated some of the glaring lacunae in the prosecution case, which even the learned State counsel before us, is unable to satisfactorily justify. We say so for the reasons set out below.

7. The present case is one where the mother of the prosecutrix (PW-9) entered the witness box and unfortunately did not support prosecution case. She completely denied that any occurrence, similar to the one described in the FIR, ever took place. She was, accordingly, declared hostile and cross-examined by the Public Prosecutor. Of course, nothing material could be extracted from her cross-examination.

8. The father of the prosecutrix (PW-8) also entered the witness box, and it is an admitted fact that he, too, made evasive statements, largely restricted to the narration of the events preceding the trial. We may note at this junction, that his statement fails to explain the delay in reporting the matter, and the lodging of the FIR. While he submitted that he reported the alleged incident to the police as soon as he was apprised of the same, we are constrained to note that the such assertion does not inspire much confidence. We say so, keeping in mind the statement made by Nirmala Devi, Pradhan of Gram Panchayat (PW-1), who simply deposed that the father of the prosecutrix came to her house after three days of the incident, i.e. on 13.08.2007, and informed her about the occurrence. She then advised him to report the matter to the police, he finally went and lodged the police report. While it is trite law that unexplained delay in lo