PARTHA SARTHY, J.:–Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent.

2. The instant appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction dated 5.7.2018 and order of sentence dated 9.7.2018 passed in Sessions Case no.538 of 2015 and Sessions Trial no. 33 of 2016 by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, POCSO Act, Muzaffarpur whereby the sole appellant was convicted under section 376(2) of the Indian Penal Code and section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and sentenced to undergo RI for 10 years under section 376(2) of the Indian Penal Code as also to pay fine of Rs.25,000/- and in case of default in payment of fine to undergo RI for 6 months with no further sentence having been passed for conviction under the POCSO Act, 2012.

3. As per the prosecution case based on the written statement of Lalan Sahani (PW2) addressed to the Officer Incharge of the Bochahan Police Station, is that on 3.1.2014 at about 3 pm, the sole appellant shut his 6 year old daughter (PW3) in the house and raped her. He further states that his daughter narrating about the occurrence. The appellant had run away. The informant prayed that an inquiry be conducted and legal action be taken.

4. On the statement of the informant (P.W.2) FIR being Bochahan P.S. Case No. 3 of 2014 was registered on 3.1.2014 under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

5. Investigation was taken up and on conclusion of the investigation charge-sheet no.122 of 2014 was submitted on 9.9.2014 under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. After taking cognizance the case was committed to the Court of Sessions and charge was framed under section 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code and section 6 of the POCSO Act.

6. The defence of the accused is that he is innocent and no such occurrence as alleged has taken place. He has been falsely implicated in the case because of land dispute.

7. The prosecution examined a total of five witnesses. P.W. 1 Rani Devi is the mother of the victim, P.W. 2 Lalan Sahni is the father of the victim as also the informant of the case, P.W.3 is the victim herself, P.W.4 is the doctor namely Vijay Kumar Prasad who medically examined the victim and P.W.5 Siya Ram Singh is the Investigating Officer of the case.

8. P.W.1 ie the mother of the victim in her statement stated that the occurrence took place about three years back when at about 3 pm her daughter was playing at the door step of Pramod Sahani. 2-3 other children were also playing there. It is stated that a child namely, Neha Kumari came and informed P.W.1 that Pramod Sahani had taken her daughter inside his house. On receiving this information P.W.1 as also her husband (P.W.2) went to the house of Promod Sahani and saw their daughter crying. Pramod Sahani had run away from his house. There was no one else in the house. P.W.1 further states that her daughter told that Pramod Sahani had opened her pant and as a result of his act of having raped her, she was bleeding from the urinary passage. Thereafter the case was lodged by her husband and she was medically treated. Their statements were recorded. She further states in her cross examination that the accused happens to be the elder brother of her husband and his house is nearby. She did not see him commit rape. Her husband reached there before her and it is not correct to state that she has lodged a false case on account of old dispute.

9. P.W.2 who happens to be the father of the victim as also the informant in the case states that the occurrence took place in the year 2014, the time being 3 pm. At the relevant time, he was at his home. At this time his niece Neha Kumari came and informed that Pramod Sahani had shut his daughter in his house. On hearing this P.W.2 states that he went to Pramod Sahani’s house where he saw that the mouth of his daughter was tied up. Pramod Sahani had run away. On opening the mouth of his daughter, she started to cry. He states that he saw her bleed. He took his daughter to the police sta