The main legal point established in the judgment is that the victim's testimony, supported by medical evidence and circumstantial evidence, can be sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused in a rape case, and the absence of injuries on the accused's male organ does not negate the charge of rape.

B.P. Katakey, J.

1. This reference under Rule 9 of the Rules for the Regulation of the Procedure of officers appointed to administer Justice in the Lushai Hills 1937 as well as the criminal appeal from jail are directed against the judgment of conviction dated 21-1-2003 passed by the learned Additional District Magistrate (Judicial) Aizawl district. Aizawl in case No. Crl. Tr. No. 2398/ 2000 convicting the accused/appellant in criminal appeal No. 1/03(J), under Section 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 3000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for further 3 (three) months.

2. The prosecution story in brief is that on 21-12-2000 at about 10.50 p.m. a first information report was submitted by PI Rochungnungi of Tlangnuam, Aizawl in Kulikawn police out post intimating that on that same night in between 8.30 to 9 p.m. her daughter who was 11 years old was raped by the accused/appellant. The police upon receipt of the first information registered Aizawl P.S. Case No. 810/2000 against the accused/appellant and took up the case for investigation. During investigation the accused was arrested. The investigating officer recorded the statement of the victim girl as well as the other witnesses and also got the victim and the accused examined by the doctor. Upon completion of investigation the charge-sheet: was filed against the accused/appellant. The learned Additional District Magistrate (Judicial) thereafter framed the charge under Section 341/376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code against the accused/appellant, who having pleaded not guilty the trial commenced.

3. During trial the prosecution in order to bring home the charge against the accused/appellant examined five witnesses including the victim, the mother of the victim, who was the first informant, the doctor who medically examined the victim and the accused and also investigating the officer who conducted the investigation. The learned trial Magistrate thereafter recorded the statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure. Upon completion of the trial the learned trial Magistrate convicted the accused/appellant under Section 376(2)(f) of the Criminal Procedure Code and sentence him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10(ten) years and to pay fine of Rs. 3000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for further period of 3 (three) months.

4. We have heard Mr. C. Lalramzauva, learned Counsel for the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 1/03(J), who is the respondent in criminal reference No. 2/03 and also Mr. N. Sailo learned Public Prosecutor, Mizoram.

5. The learned Counsel for the accused/ appellant has challenged the judgment of conviction recorded by the learned trial Magistrate on two grounds :

(i) The accused/appellant was not called upon to enter into defence and adduce any evidence he may have in support thereof, as required under Section 233 of the Criminal Procedure Code and as such the entire trial is vitiated because of non-compliance of the said mandatory provision.

(ii) The prosecution has failed to prove that there was penetration of the male organ of generation so as to constitute the rape "within the meaning of Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code and the doctor upon medical examination of the accused/appellant having found that there was no injuries on the male organ of the accused, he ought to have been acquitted from the charge under Section 376(2)(f), IPC by giving the benefit of doubt and by accepting the defence person that there was no penetration of male organ of generation but penetration by means of his finger only.

6. The factual matrix of this appeal is related to sordid and obnoxious incidents where the accused/appellant was at the relevant point of time about 22 years old and known to the victim family, with a view to satisfy his animated persons sexual pleasure sexually assaulted a young girl of 11 years old who was a