P.K. Saikia, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 24-2-2012, passed by Addl. Sessions Judge-IV, Aizawl Judicial District, Aizawl in Crl. Tr. No. 979/2008 under S. 376(2)(f), IPC convicting one Mr. P.C. Lalnunnema of offence under Section 376(2)(f), IPC and sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 1 (one) month for the offence aforesaid. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with aforesaid judgment, he preferred this appeal from jail. Mr. P.C. Lalnunnema would be referred to hereinafter as the accused person.

2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of the present appeal are that on 13-7-2008 Smt. Thanhliri, mother of the prosecutrix, submitted a written complaint to the President, MHIP Khumtung Branch with a request to take appropriate action against the accused/appellant who had repeatedly raped her daughter. The victim above would be referred to hereinafter as "LK".

3. On being informed, Smt. Saithangpuii, the President of MHIP Khumtung Branch, submitted an FIR with police at Serchhip Police Station on 15-7-2008. The Police on receipt of the FIR, so lodged by the President, MHIP Khumtung Branch, registered a case under Sect. 376(2)(f), IPC and ordered the matter to be investigated by one C. Ramnunmawili, an S.I. of police. C. Ramnunmawili was examined as PW-8.

4. During the course of investigation, the I.O. visited the place of occurrence, examined the witnesses including the victim, got the victim examined by doctor, seized some articles during the course of investigation and on conclusion of the investigation, she submitted a charge-sheet under Section 376(2)(f) IPC against the accused person and forwarded the accused to the Court to stand his trial there.

5. The Magistrate before whom the charge-sheet was laid, committed the case to the Court of Sessions Judge. Learned Sessions Judge, Aizawl, in turn, transferred the case to the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Aizawl District, Aizawl for disposal in accordance with law. On the receipt of the case on transferred, the Addl. Sessions Judge, Aizawl District, Aizawl heard the learned counsel for the parties and thereafter, framed charge under Section 376(2)(f), IPC against the accused person.

6. The charge, so framed, on being read over and explained to the accused person, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. During trial, the prosecution has examined as many as 9 witnesses including the victim and the I.O. of the case. The statements of the accused person were recorded under 313 Cr. P.C. and his plea was of total denial.

7. The learned trial Court, on conclusion of the trial and after hearing the argument, advanced by learned counsel for the parties, convicted the accused persons of offence under Section 376(2)(f), IPC and sentenced him to punishment as aforesaid. It is that judgment which has been assailed in this proceeding on the grounds more than one.

8. While arguing the case on behalf of accused/appellant, Smt. Dinari T. Azyu, the learned Amicus Curiae contended that there are several serious legal infirmities in the prosecution case under consideration. However, learned trial Court overlooked all those infirmities in the prosecution case and came to the conclusion that the prosecution has successfully proved the charge leveled against the accused person and convicted him as aforesaid.

9. One of the most serious allegations leveled against the prosecution case was that there was serious delay in initiating the case under consideration against the accused/appellant. Such delay was not at all explained. In the facts and circumstances of the case, delay which remained unexplained only serves to show that the case in question is a concocted one.

10. It has also been contended that there was evidence to show that the prosecutrix had sexual intercourse with some other persons of the locality during the time under consideration. There is also evidence to show that