The victim's evidence in cases of rape stands on a higher pedestal than that of an injured witness and does not require corroboration if found to be truthful, trustworthy, and reliable.

JUDGMENT :

A.M. BADAR, J.

1. By this appeal, appellant/convicted accused, Tulmul Rai @ Bisheshwar Rai is challenging the Judgment and order dated 26.08.2016 and 29.08.2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rosera, Samastipur, in Sessions Trial No. 286 of 2012 between the parties, thereby convicting him of the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years apart from a direction to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. For the sake of convenience, the appellant shall be referred to in his original capacity as “an accused.”

2. Facts leading to the prosecution of the accused projected from the police report can be summarized thus:

(A) PW-5 Mr. S. (identity concealed) used to reside at village Narhan Durga Asthan falling under jurisdiction of Police Station Bibhutipur, District Samastipur. The victim of the crime in question is his 12 years old daughter PW-4 Ms. S. (identify concealed). The incident in question allegedly took place at about 11 P.M. of 12.05.2010. At that time, PW-5 Mr. S. (identity concealed) was not present at the house. He had gone for purchasing medicines. His wife PW-3 Mrs. M. (identity concealed) had gone to visit Doctor Kanak for her treatment. Their daughter PW-4 Ms. S. was alone in the house.

(B) According to the prosecution case, at about 8 P.M. of 12.05.2010, the accused enticed Ms. S. and took her to the orchard of Dina Choudhary. There he had committed forcible sexual intercourse with PW-4 Ms. J.

(C) Upon knowing about the incident, PW-5 Mr. S. lodged report on 12.05.2010 with Police Station Bibhutipur which has resulted in registration of Crime No. 120 of 2010 for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused.

(D) After following routine investigation, the accused came to be charge sheeted. The learned trial court had framed and explained the charge to the accused. He pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

(E) In order to bring home the guilt to the accused, the prosecution has examined in all five witnesses. The defence of the accused was that of total denial. He however did not enter in the defeance.

3. Despite chances none appeared for the appellant. I heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing the State. He supported the impugned Judgment and order.

4. Upon hearing the submissions of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and on perusal of the record and proceedings, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned Judgment and order of conviction and resultant sentence is not requiring any interference and the appeal deserves to be dismissed.

5. Evidence of the victim of the crime in question in the offence of rape is of prime importance. By now, it is well settled that rape is a ghastly act which leaves the victim shattered for the life as it causes not only physical but emotional and psychological trauma to the victim. Sexual activities with young girls of immature age have a traumatic effect on them, which persists throughout the life of such victims. It is also well settled that the victim of offence of rape is not an accomplice, but she is the victim of lust of another person. Her evidence, therefore, stands on higher pedestal than the evidence of an injured witness. Therefore, if totality of circumstances emerging on record discloses that the victim of such offence does not have any motive to falsely implicate the accused, then, it is absolutely not necessary to search for any corroboration to the evidence of the victim of such offence and the court is generally bound to accept version of such victim.

6. It is in evidence of PW-4 Ms. S. that on the day of the incident, at about 8 P.M. she was cooking food at her house. At that time, the accused came and forcibly took her in the orchard of Dina Choudhary. There the accused committed rape on her. The victim of the crime in question further deposed that when