The consistent and corroborative evidence of the victim and her mother, along with the lack of evidence to discredit the prosecution's case, led to the court's decision to convict the accused.

1. This is an appeal against the judgment and order, dated 11.12.2013, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. IV, Kamrup at Guwahati convicting the accused- appellant under Section 376(2)(f)/511 IPC and sentencing him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 5 (five) years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default to undergo further Rigorous Imprisonment for 1 (one) month in Sessions Case No. 341(K)/2011.

2. Heard Mr. D. Talukdar, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. B.J. Dutta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State of Assam/respondent No. 1 as well as Mr. H. Bhuyan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2.

3. The prosecution case is that, on 25.11.2011, at about 1 p.m. the accused/appellant was playing ludo with the victim, while her mother, PW-2, was sleeping at that time. The accused-appellant attempted to commit rape on the victim, who was a 9 year old girl at that time, and to implement his such criminal intention, he made the victim lie on the floor. The victim raised alarm following which her mother came out and the accused-appellant fled away from the place of occurrence. On the basis of such facts, the FIR (Exhibit-4) was lodged by the mother of the victim/PW-2.

4. On receipt of the FIR, Boko Police Station registered a case being Boko P.S. Case No. 297/2011. The case was investigated, evidence was collected and after exhausting all the procedural formalities, finally, charge-sheet was filed against the accused-appellant under Sections 448/376/511 IPC.

5. The charge against the accused-appellant was framed under Section 376/511 IPC, to which, the accused-appellant pleaded innocence. Therefore the trial proceeded. After completion of the trial, he accused-appellant was convicted as indicated above.

6. The issue before this Court are for deciding as to whether the accused-appellant attempted to commit rape on the victim and whether the accused-appellant trespassed into the house of the informant with a view to commit an offence there.

7. In respect of the 2nd part, i.e. commission of house trespass, the accused-appellant appears to have committed no offence in view of the admitted position in the FIR itself that the victim and the accused-appellant were playing ludo at the relevant point of time in the house of the victim. One of the elements of the offence under Section 448 IPC is to trespass into the house with the intention of committing the offence. It has not come out from the evidence on record that he trespassed into the house of the informant with a view to commit an offence rather he was there playing ludo with the minor girl with the knowledge and approval of the informant and he used to come to the house of the informant earlier also for playing ludo.

8. Now let us scan the evidence to arrive at a decision as to the alleged offence committed by the accused-appellant under Sections 376/511 IPC.

9. The victim, examined as PW-1, implicated the accused-appellant, who took her to another room of their house, grabbed her, and thereafter, penetrated his penis repeatedly in her vagina. At this point of time, her mother appeared and the accused-appellant fled from the scene of occurrence. In her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.PC also, she appears to be consistent with the evidence she has led in her examination-in-chief as PW-1.

10. The informant/mother of the victim, examined as PW-2 is found to have deposed in her evidence that the accused/appellant visited her house for playing ludo with the victim on the date of occurrence and he was playing ludo with her daughter/victim. At the relevant time of the occurrence, this witness was sleeping and after hearing the alarm raised by her daughter/victim, she came out only to witness that the victim was laid down on the floor with the gamocha wearing at that time by the accused-appellant removed and then attempting to have penetrating sexual inter-course with the victim. He failed to have pen