1. - By this appeal, under Section 374(2) Criminal Procedure Code, the accused-appellant has challenged the judgment dated 19.04.1985 passed by learned ADJ, Gangapur City, in Sessions Case No. 32/84, wherein the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 376/511 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to five years' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of which to further undergo three months' R.I.

2. This criminal case was initiated on 13.11.1983, when a report was submitted by Smt. Gaindi to Shri Shyam Sunder, A.S.I., Gangapur City while he was petrolling. The said report was submitted by the informant/mother in respect of her daughter Chhoti, alleging that the accused-appellant had committed offence against her, as aforesaid. It was stated in the report that when the daughter of the informant had gone for call of nature, in the early hours of the morning, the accused-appellant had come and threw the prosecutrix on the ground by catching hold of her neck. It was also stated in the report that cloth was put in the mouth of the prosecutrix and the accused misbehaved with her. It is stated that when Chhoti, while lying down on the ground, raised hue and cry then one Sediya and Hazari came to the place of occurrence and both these persons took away the accused.

3. As the said report was submitted to Shyam Sunder A.S.I. when he was petrolling, he immediately went to the place of occurrence and on his return, he sent the report to the police station with the endorsement, on the reverse side, for registration of the case. Thereafter, an F.I.R. came to be registered (395/83) at about 6.00 p.m. for the offence under Section 376/511 Indian Penal Code On the conclusion of the investigation, the police submitted challan in the Court of ACJM, Gangapur City. Thereafter, the learned Magistrate committed the case to the Sessions Court at Sawai Madhopur. The case was then transferred to the learned ADJ, Gangapur City and the same was received by it on 15.05.84.

4. The learned trial court after hearing the parties, framed charges against the accused, vide its judgment dated 28.04.84, for the offence under Section 376/511 Indian Penal Code The accused denied the charges and claimed for trial. The prosecution had produced 8 witnesses and 9 document, which were duly exhibited before the trial court, in support of its case. Subsequently, the statement of the accused under Section 313 Criminal Procedure Code were recorded, wherein he stated that the prosecution story is totally false. Accused had specifically stated that the prosecutrix Chhoti and he were working together as labour in the railways. The prosecutrix had borrowed some amount from the accused and it was on account of repayment of the same that a dispute arose between the parties. According to the accused, it was for the said reason that instant case had been falsely registered against him. In the last, the accused had stated that the parties have entered into a compromise and the same has been placed on record. The accused had produced Ratan Lal (DW-1) as a defence witness, who was the person who had got the compromise executed between the parties.

5. The learned trial court had considered, primarily the statements of Smt. Chhoti (PW-2), Smt. Gaindi (PW-3), Sediya son of Chhittar (PW-5) and Dr. Radheshaym Parashar (PW-1). The learned trial court, on the conclusion of the trial and vide its judgment dated 19.04.85, convicted and sentenced the accused appellant for the offences, as aforesaid.

6. The learned counsel for accused-appellant had submitted that a totally false case had been registered on account of dispute with regard to the loan given to prosecutrix. He had further submitted that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt in respect of the offence of attempt to commit rape. He had stated that the prosecution witnesses Chhoti and Gaindi are the interested persons. So far as, the two independent witnesses are concerned, Hazari (PW-6) h