AKIL KURESHI, J.

These appeals arise out of the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara, in Sessions Case No.151/2010. The accused was charged with offences punishable under Sections 376 and 506(2) of the IPC. He was convicted for the said offences. For offence under Section 376, he was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years. For offence under Section 506(2), he was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six months. Fine was also imposed. Accused has challenged his conviction in Criminal Appeal No. 863/2012. The State seeking enhancement of sentence has filed Criminal Appeal No.224/2012.

2. Briefly stated, the prosecution version was that Radha, daughter of the accused and the victim studied in the same school. In the month of February, 2009, the victim had gone to the house of her friend Radha for studying. The accused sent his daughter away for some errand and when he and the victim were alone, after closing the front door of the house, raped her. Victim was aged about 15 years at that time. Under the threat, she did not complain to anybody about this incident. However, nearly eight months later when her mother found out that she was pregnant, she and her mother went to the police station for lodging the FIR. Later on she also gave birth to a male child.

3. The victim girl, PW1 was examined at Exh.7. She deposed that she lived with her mother and sister at Vadodara. Her father had left the house six years back. She studied in Government school at Gothri in 7th standard. Her sister also studied in the same school. Her sister Pooja and Radha were friends. They were studying in the same class. In the second month of 2009, she went to Radha- s house in the afternoon at about 12 O- clock for studying. The accused was present at that time. He sent Radha to a shop. She also tried to join Radha, but the accused insisted that she should stay back. After that he closed the front grill, put her on a cot forcibly and raped her. Then he threatened with a knife that as it is she does not have a father, if she tells her mother, he would kill her. She went home and did not inform anybody. Later the people of the house where her mother was working started whispering. One neighbour lady told her mother that the victim was heavily pregnant. When the mother asked her about it, she revealed the incident. They then went to the police station and lodged FIR on 10.10.2009 which was produced at Exh.8. She gave birth to a male child on 12.12.2009.

In the cross-examination, she stated that she knew Ashok Jagdev who was her mother- s nephew. Radha and her sister Pooja were in the same class. She was in a different class. On the date of the incident, she had come home after appearing in the examination. She agreed that Pooja and Radha were studying together since they were in the same class. During examination all the three of them would study together. She however, denied that on the date of the incident, Pooja was also there with her. Many people lived near the house of Radha. If she shouted, persons in the next house could hear. She however, clarified that since the accused threatened her, she did not shout. She denied that her mother had demanded Rs.50,000/- from the accused. She also denied that she had any love affair.

4. Urmilaben Mukeshbhai Patel, PW2, mother of the victim, was examined at Exh.9. She deposed that she lived at Vadodara with her two daughters. Her husband had left the house 6 to 7 years back and was not traceable. Radha was studying in the same school as her daughters. In the month of October, when she had gone to a shop of Seemaben, she told her that her daughter was eight months pregnant. When she asked her daughter, she narrated the incident of being raped by the accused.

In the cross-examination, she was asked whether the birth of the victim girl was registered. She took time and produced birth certificate at Exh.10 which showed her date of birth as 30.10.1995. Though she knew Ashok Jagdev,