The judgment emphasizes the importance of substantial proof, timely reporting of incidents, and the need for DNA analysis in cases of sexual assault allegations.

JUDGMENT

1. At the outset it is required to be noted that since the allegations leveled by the prosecutrix are in respect of the alleged sexual assault, the identity of the prosecutrix and RespondentOriginal accused needs to be concealed, therefore, the prosecutrix is referred to as "ABC" and Respondent is referred to as "XYZ". The Registry is directed to maintain the record accordingly.

2. The prosecution case story in short can be summarized as under:-

The prosecutrix at the relevant time, a young girl of 14 years of age, was residing along with her family consisting of mother, father, brother and sister at 12/A Command Hospital, Right Flying Lines, Wanwadi, Pune. A woman namely Kristy Swami is residing near the house. Kristy Swami has a daughter. Accused is brother of Kristy Swami 's husband. He was frequently coming to the house of Kristy Swami. At the relevant time the prosecutrix was studying in 6th Standard in Utkarsh English Medium School, Solapur Bazzar, Camp Pune. The accused used to drop daughter of Kristy Swami to school on his scooter. Sometimes, he was taking prosecutrix also on his scooter to her school. After 15 days of Ganpati festival of the year 2001, accused met the prosecutrix near Napier Road, Dargah and told her that he will drop her to school. He took her on his scooter, purchased petrol from a petrol pump, and took her on to the room of his friend situated in front of Empress Garden. Wife of his friend went out of the room for household work. Thereafter, accused closed the door from inside and told prosecutix to put off her clothes. It was at about 8.00 am to 9.00 am. Accused also put off his clothes and committed sexual intercourse with her. Accused then brought her and left her near house after school hours are over. Thereafter, accused took her once in eight days to the same room and committed sexual intercourse with her. Lastly, on 25/09/2001 at about 7.45 am., when the prosecutix was going to her school, accused again met her near the Napier Road, Dargah, and took her on scooter to the room of his friend and after the wife of his friend went away, committed sexual intercourse with the proseutrix two times by closing door from inside. The accused and the prosecutix were in that room till 3.30 pm. Then the accused took her and brought to her house. The mother of the prosecutix asked her as to why she returned late to the house. That time, prosecutix told her mother about the acts committed by the accused. The parents of the accused did not chose to fle FIR promptly. It is after the prosecutrix missed her menstrual course, as per the advice of her parents, she lodged FIR on 07/10/2001 in Wanwadi Police Station, Pune.

Upon registration of FIR C.R. No. 190/2001 came to be registered. The then Assistant Police Inspector Mr. V.D. Hake of Wanwadi Police Station, who was entrusted with the investigation, referred the prosecutrix to the Sasson Hospital, Pune, for medical examination. He arrested the accused under arrest panchnama. He recorded statements of parents and uncle of prosecutix on 07/10/2001. On 08/10/2001, he prepared spot panchnama in the presence of two panchas. He seized clothes of accused under panchnama on 08/10/2001. He also seized clothes of prosecutix under separate panchnama. He collected medical examination certifcate and age certifcate of prosecutix. Thereafter, he send sealed packets received from Sasoon Hospital, and seized muddemal property to chemical analyzer. After completion of investigation, he submitted chargesheet on 24.10.2001 in the court of JMFC, Cantonment Court, Pune, who in turn committed the case to the Sessions Court, Pune, for trial.

3. The trial Court framed the charge and conducted a full fedged trial. By the impugned judgment and order, the trial Court acquitted the respondent. Hence, this appeal fled by the State.

4. Learned APP appearing for appellant-State submits that at the relevant time the prosecutrix was minor and she has categorically deposed before the tr