Mukta Gupta, J.

1. Non-bailable warrants have not been executed, however the appellant is present in Court with counsel.

2. Arguments have been addressed in the appeal by learned counsel for the appellant and learned APP for State.

3. Kaushal Kumar challenges the impugned judgment dated 9th October, 2001 convicting him for offences punishable under Section 366/376 IPC and the order on sentence dated 12th October, 2001 directing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 366 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC.

4. The prosecution case is solely based on the testimony of PW-4 prosecutrix who deposed as under:-

“I studied in Ngr. Nigam School and passed 9th class. My father is a generator mechanic. 3/4 persons used to work with them i.e. Raju, another Raju also and Satish and one Kaushal accused present in the court today. My father used to take liquor and my mother and father used to quarrel with each other. My father wanted separation from my mother. My mother did not give divorce and