The court emphasized the importance of victim testimony, medical evidence, and the need for a substantiated alibi in cases of sexual assault.

1. - This criminal appeal under section 374 Cr.P.C. arises out of the judgment dated 2.9.1997 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur, convicting the appellant under section 376 IPC and sentencing him to 7 years RI and fine of Rs. 500/-.

2. The short facts of the case are these. On 4.9.1995 Chhaju (8 years) and his sister Chhota (14 years) had alighted from the bus at Nayla turn to go to Teja Baba. It is stated that accused-Raj Kumar chased them from the Nayla Mod and after covering some distance, he scolded Chhaju, who, being frightened, ran away. Thereafter, the accused took Chhota at some distance and committed rape on her at knife point. The First Information Report Ex.P/4 was lodged within three hours of the occurrence at Police Station Amer by Sohan Lal (PW 4). During investigation, the police got, Chhota medically examined by Dr. Pushpa Nagar (PW 8), interrogated the witnesses and arrested the accused. After the completion of the investigation, a challan was filed.

3. To a charge under section 376 IPC, the accused-appellant pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined Chhaju (PW 1), Chhota (PW 2), Ram Sahai (PW 3), Sohan Lal (PW 4), Gopal (PW 5), Kalyan (PW 6), Om Prakash (PW 7), Dr. Smt. Pushpa Nagar (PW 8), Ashu Singh (PW 10), Ram Swaroop (PW 11) and Dr. Sahib Singh (PW 12). Accused in his statement under section 313 Cr.P.C. denied the accusation. He stated that he has been falsely implicated in the case because the persons of Mali community are inimical to him. He also stated that on the date of occurrence, he was at Jaipur to attend a Court case. He examined Ram Chandra (DW 1), Ram Kalyan (DW 2), Babu Lal (DW 3) and Ram Kishore (DW 4) in his defend. The learned trial judge held that Mst. Chhota was less than 16 years of age at the time of occurrence. He further held that the accused had committed rape on Chhota. He, therefore, convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant as stated above.

4. Shri Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant contended that the age of Chhota could be more than 16 years as the Medical Officer admits that there could be difference of one year in the age given by him. He urged that the prosecution has not been able to prove by positive evidence that intercourse had taken place. Pointing out that Chhota did not report the matter to the camel man whom she had seen, he argued that a false case has been lodged against the accused after the relations of the prosecutrix reached the spot. In this connection, he pointed out that the parents of the girl have not been examined and one lady, who had filed a case against the accused used to attend the Court along with Chhota. Shri Gupta pointed out that though according to Chhota, she was dragged and rape was committed on the rough ground, yet no injury was found on her person, he canvassed that Chhota was not subjected to sexual intercourse.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, contended that the prosecution has successfully brought home the guilt against the accused. He submitted that there could not be any reason for the prosecutrix to falsely implicate the accused, if the rape was committed by some other person. In this connection, he pointed out that the accused has led evidence to show that the person who had sexually assaulted Chhota was some other person and not the accused.

6. I have carefully gone through the evidence produced in the case. Chhota has deposed that she was 14 to 15 years of age on the date her statement was recorded in the Court. Her statement was recorded some 9 months after the alleged occurrence. Thus according to her statement, Chhota was not more than 14 years of age on the date of occurrence. The medical evidence contained in the statement of Dr. Sahib Singh (PW 12) also shows that Chhota was less than 16 years of age at the time she was examined by him. His statement is based on the basis of the occification test. It may be that he has admitted that there could be difference of on