The reliability of the prosecutrix's testimony and the requirement for corroboration of her evidence with other evidence in cases of sexual assault.

Khem Chand Sharma, J.-This criminal appeal by appellant Kishan Lal sent through Supreintendent, Central Jail, Kota arises out of the Judgment dated 19.6.2000 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Aklera, district Jhalawar, by which, the learned trial Judge has convicted the appellant under Section 376, 363 and 366 IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years with a fine of Rs. 5 00/-on the first Court, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years with a fine of Rs. 5 00/-on the second count and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years with a fine of Rs. 500 on the third count. In default of payment of fine the appellant was to undergo simple imprisonment for one month on each count.

2. Succinctly stated that facts of the case are that on 1.1999, complainant Sardar Bai (PW4) W/o Prabhu Lal Gujar submitted a written report, Ex.. P3 at Police Station Ghatoli, alleging therein that on 11.99 her daughter Kabbu Bai aged about 14 years was at home. In the evening, accused Kishan Lal enticed her and took her away with him and has not returned as yet. She alleged that accused took her daughter at about 4.00 PM to the camp (Dera) near Chandpuria and from there, he absconded with her daughter. On this report, police registered a case for offence under Section 363 and 366 IPC vide FIR, E.P10 and proceeded with the investigation.

3. Thegirl was recovered on 1.99 at 5.50 PM. Her Petticoat and underwear of accused appellant were seized, vide Exts. 5 and 7 respectively. She was subjected to medical examination. The accused was arrested and he was also subjected to medical examination. After usual investigation the police submitted a charge sheet against the appellant.

4. Thelearned Trial Court, on the basis of evidence and material collected during investigation, framed charged against the appellant for offence under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC. The appellant denied the charges and claimed trial.

5. In Order to prove its case, the prosecution examined 9 witnesses and got exhibited some documents. The accused was then examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He did not examine any witness in his defence.

6. At the conclusion of trial, the learned trial Judge found the prosecution case, as alleged proved and accordingly convicted and sentenced the appellant in the manner stated herein above. Hence the present appeal against conviction.

7. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the impugned Judgment , the evidence and material on record.

.8. In assailing the conviction, learned Amicus Curiae vehemently argued that the Trial Court has committed serious error in basing conviction of the appellant on the evidence ofprosecutrix. Learned Counsel argued that the testimony ofprosecutrix does not find support from the medical evidence and it cannot be said

.that rape was committed on the prosecutrix. There is no other evidence except the evidence ofprosecutrix, to establish the charge.

9. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has supported the Judgment of the Trial Court and has contended that finding of guilt is based on proper appreciation of evidence and it may not be interfered with.

10. I have considered the rival submissions. In the cases involving sexual assault, it is well settled that a pro secutrix complaining of having been a victim of offence of rape is not an accoplice after the crime. There is no Rule oflaw that her testimony cannot be accepted upon without corroboration in material particulars. She stands on a higher pedestal than an injured witness. If the Court of facts finds it difficult to accept the version of the prosecutrix on its face value, it may search for evidence, direct or circumstantial, which would lend assurance to her testimony. Assurance, short of corroboration as understood in the context of an accomplice, would suffice.

11. The edifice of the entire prosecution case solely rested on the evidence ofprosecutrix and that of medical evidence. Therefore, it is essential