The benefit of doubt must be extended to the accused when inconsistencies in evidence, lack of witness support, and contradictory medical evidence are present.

1. The appellants seek to assail the judgment and order dated 07-10-2002 in Special Case 91/1997 delivered by the learned Special Judge & 3rd Ad hoc Assistant Sessions Judge, Wardha, by and under which the appellants are convicted for offence punishable under Section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code and are sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to payment of fine of Rs.2,000/-. The appellants are, however, acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(x)(xii) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the “Atrocities Act”).

2. Heard Shri R.M. Daga, learned Counsel for the appellants and Shri N.B. Jawade, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.

3. Shri R.M. Daga, learned Counsel for the appellants (hereinafter referred to as the “accused”) submits that the judgment of conviction is against the weight of evidence on record. The evidence of the prosecutrix and the evidence of Punjab Khandare (P.W.3) is at stark variance with each other. The version of the prosecutrix is falsified by the medical evidence, is the submission.

Per contra, Shri N.B. Jawade, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent would submit that the evidence of the prosecutrix is implicitly trustworthy and confidence inspiring. The absence of injuries on the person including the genitalia of the prosecutrix is not decisive. In view of the evidence of the prosecutrix, which is cogent and reliable, the absence of injuries would be of scant significance, is the submission.

4. The prosecution case, as is unfolded, during the course of the trial, is that the prosecutrix was a student of Adiwasi Ashram School. In Diwali vacation, she was visiting her grandfather Punjabrao, a resident of Taroda. The incident occurred on 09-11-1997. On the fateful day, the prosecutrix went to sleep at 9-00 p.m. or thereabout along with one Sarla in the room of the house. Her grandfather Punjabrao and grandmother were sleeping in the varandah of the house. Between 10-00 to 10-30 p.m. the prosecutrix felt uneasiness in the abdomen and went to answer the nature's call. She went towards the road, after placing the water container on the ground when she was about to remove the underwear, two persons accosted her from behind, one of them pressed her mouth and the other caught her hands, both bodily lifted and took the prosecutrix to the adjacent field. One person pressed her mouth by his right hand and held her both hands with the left hand. The other person untied her Salwar, removed her underwear and after lifting the salwar upwards, committed forcible sexual intercourse. The other person had gagged her mouth while she was being ravished. No soon did the hand was removed from the mouth, the prosecutrix cried aloud. Her grandfather Punjab and two to three others rushed to the spot. Both the persons, on seeing Punjabrao and others rushing to the spot, fled. The prosecutrix was in a position to identify them by face.

The prosecutrix and her grandfather Punjabrao went to Karanja Police Station. The prosecutrix lodged oral report which was reduced into writing. The prosecutrix was referred for medical examination and the Medical Officer, Primary Health Center, Karanja examined the prosecutrix and issued a medico legal certificate. On the basis of the oral report and medical certificate, offence under Section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code and 3(1)(x)(xii) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act was registered against the accused.

5. Police Sub-Inspector Yadav Rathod investigated the crime. He prepared the spot panchanama, arrested both the accused and referred them for medical examination. The accused were medically examined and the medico legal certificates were obtained. The investigating officer seized the clothes from the prosecutrix and both the accused. Blood sample, vaginal swab and pubic hair of the pro