P. V. HARDAS, J.

Appellant/Original accused no.1 who stands convicted for the offence punishable under Section 376 r/w. 511, 452, 324 and 506 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs.500/- i.d. to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months, by the VIIIth Addl. Sessions Judge, Thane, by judgment dated 30.06.1992, in Sessions Case No. 475 of 1991, by this appeal questions the correctness of his conviction and sentence.

2. The facts as are necessary for the decision of this appeal may be stated thus:

P.W.11 P. I. Ashok Wankhede, who on 3.2.1991 was attached to Shahapur Police Station, recorded the complaint of P.W.1 victim (whose name is deliberately withheld) at Exhibit 11. On the basis of the said statement, offence vide Crime No.56 of 1991 under Section 376(g), 324, 452, 506 of Indian Penal Code was registered. P.W.11 P.I. Wankhede proceeded to the scene of incident and drew scene of incident panchanama at Exhibit 41. The victim was referred for medical examination under requisition at Exhibit 42. Statements of witnesses were recorded and search of the accused was undertaken. The other accused were arrested and the clothes were seized under seizure memo at Exhibit 23. The accused were referred for medical examination and on 11.2.1991. The appellant was arrested under arrest panchanama. The appellant was referred for medical examination under requisition at Exhibit 47. During custodial interrogation the appellant expressed his willingness to point out the place where the knife had been concealed. Accordingly, memorandum at Exhibit 27 was drawn. The appellant led the police and the panchas to his house and produced the knife which was seized under seizure memo. The knife is at Article 16. The Naib Tahsildar was requested to conduct the test identification parade. The seized property was referred to the Chemical Analyser under requisition at Exhibit 49. Further to the completion of the investigation charge-sheet against the appellant was filed.

3. The appellant was examined by P.W.10 Dr. Janardan Nimbore, who had noticed the following injuries:

"Abrasion over left thumb 3 cm x 2 cm x 1 cm tenderness was present. There was teeth bite on the left thumb."

According to him the injury can be caused by hard and blunt object. The injury certificate is at Exhibit 35.

The pubic hair and semen samples of the appellant were also obtained.

4. The test identification parade was conducted by P.W.9 Executive Magistrate Vasant Kamble. Initially the victim could not identify any of the accused. Janibai identified the appellant and wrongly identified the two dummies as A2 and A4. Zipribai could not identify any of the accused. Similarly, Chaitybai also could not identify any of the accused.

5. The victim was examined by P.W.7 Dr. Nagrajan Sitaram, who noticed that there was a old tear to the hymen and the vagina admitted two fingers. He did not notice any external injury and therefore could not opine if the victim had been ravished. She had also examined P.W.2 Janibai and had noticed that she had sustained contused lacerated wound 1" x 1/2" over the right mixillary region bone deep, and had sustained contusion 1/2" x 1/2" over the left frontal region.

6. On committal of the case to the Court of Session, the trial court framed charge against the accused vide Exhibit 3 for offence punishable under Section 452, 376(2)(g), 324 r/w. 34 and 506 r/w. 34 of I.P.c. The accused denied their guilt and claimed to be tried. The prosecution, in support of its case examined 11 witnesses to establish that the accused had committed rape on the victim P.W.1. The trial court accepted the evidence of the prosecution and convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforestated while acquitting the other accused.

7. With the assistance of the learned APP Mr. Dedhia, we have perused the evidence of the witnesses. P.W.1 victim deposes that she was residing along with her mother P.W.2 Janibai, her grandmother Zipriba