V.K. JAIN, J.

1. This is an appeal against the Judgment dated 25th July, 2007 and the Order on Sentence dated 1st August, 2007, whereby the appellant was convicted under Sections 363/376 IPC and was sentenced to undergo RI for five years and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- or to undergo SI for six months in default under Section 363 of IPC. He was further sentenced to undergo RI for 12 years and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/- or to undergo SI for two years in default, under Section 376(2)(f) of IPC. Out of fine, Rs.15,000/- was directed to be paid to the prosecutrix, as compensation.

2. The case of the prosecution, as set out in the FIR lodged by Smt. Bimla, mother of the prosecutrix on 3rd July, 2004, is that on 2nd July, 2004, at about 10.30 pm, when the complainant was present in her house and her husband was taking bath on the hand pump in front of her jhuggi, her daughter, aged about 8 years, came weeping. On being asked as to why she was weeping, she informed her mother that the appellant had taken her to a school on the pretext of giving toffee and had done bad act with her. On checking the prosecutrix, the complainant found blood on her vagina. Since telephone booths had closed at that time, they could not inform the police at night. In the morning, her husband went to the house of the appellant and brought him from there with him. They then brought the prosecutrix as well as the appellant to the Police Station and presented them to the police.

3. The prosecutrix came in the witness box as PW-1 and was examined after certain preliminary question had been put to her and the learned Trial Judge was satisfied that the child was able to understand the proceedings and could be examined as a child witness. The prosecutrix stated that when she was playing outside her house, her mother was sleeping and her father was taking meals inside, the appellant came there and took her to the school with tin-shed on the pretext of giving her toffees. He removed his underwear as well as her underwear and had sexual intercourse with her, as a result of which blood came out of her private part. On reaching home, she told her parents about the incident. Thereupon, her parents called the appellant from his house. The police also came to the spot. She was taken to hospital where she was medically examined and her undergarments were seized. She was also produced before the Magistrate where she gave statement, as Ex.PW-1/A. She identified her underwear, which was shown to her in the Court.

4. PW-2, Smt. Bimla, is the mother of the prosecutrix. She stated that on 2nd July, 2004, when her husband was taking bath on the hand pump and she was busy in household work, her daughter, aged about 8 years at that time, came weeping and on being asked, informed that she was taken to school with tin-shed, by the appellant, on the pretext of giving toffee to her. On checking her daughter, she noticed blood oozing out from her private part. Her husband, on being informed by her, went to the house of the appellant and brought him to their jhuggi. They tried to search the mobile to inform the police, but due to odd hours, her husband decided to take the prosecutrix to the Police Station in the morning. She further stated that they had taken prosecutrix to the Police Station, from where she was taken to hospital and was medically examined there.

5. PW-3, Hukum Chand, is the father of the prosecutrix. He has stated that on 2nd July, 2004, when his daughter was standing near him and was insisting on taking bath, the appellant came there and asked her to accompany him to take something, but, he refused and told the appellant that his daughter used to sleep early in the night. When he again came back to the hand pump, he found his daughter missing. The wife and brother-in-law of the appellant also reached there and they tried to trace her in the locality. In the meantime, his daughter returned. She was perplexed at that time. On being asked two