The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on medical evidence, witness testimonies, and forensic report to establish guilt, the requirement of evidence to prove specific elements of an offence, and the consideration of age and social background in determining the appropriate sentence.

1. - This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 20.11.2004 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Churu in Special Sessions Case No. 51/2003 recording conviction of accused-appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 376(1) I.P.C. read with Section 3 (2)(v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and awarding sentence as under :

2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that on 23.9.2003 at about 9:00 pm one Shri Chandra Ram Meghwal orally reported at Police Station, Ratangarh about commission of rape with his minor daughter "K" (complete name of victim has not been given consciously) by the accused-appellant. As per the information given "K" aged 10 years went to the fields to get the goats grazed and returned to home at about 5:00 pm. At that time she was weeping and on asking stated that accused Subhan caught hold of her and then committed rape in the field of Ramjan. Hearing her screams Bhagwana Ram came towards the spot and on seeing him the accused tried to flee. On being chased by Bhagwana Ram, the accused gave beating to him also.

3. On basis of the information aforesaid a case was lodged (being FIR No. 245/2003) for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3(xii) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

4. During the course of investigation medical examination of the victim girl and injured-Bhagwana Ram was made. The accused was arrested and was also subjected to medical examination. After completion of investigation, a police report as per provisions of Section 173 Cr. P.C., was submitted before the competent court and the case was then committed to the Court of Sessions. After hearing counsel for the accused-Subhan Khan charges for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(f), 323 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 were framed and on denial of the same, the trial commenced as desired.

5. The prosecution supported its case with the aid of eleven witnesses (PW-1 to PW-11) and by exhibiting several documents (Exhibit-P/1 to Exhibit-P/25). An opportunity was given to the accused to explain the adverse circumstances appearing in prosecution evidence, wherein he termed the evidence adduced as false and concocted. In defence document (Exhibit-D/1) i.e. statement given by injured Bhagwana Ram during the course of investigation as per Section 161 Cr. P.C., was exhibited.

6. After examining the entire evidence available on record and hearing counsel for the accused and the learned Public Prosecutor, the trial court held the accused guilty for the offences charged and sentenced him accordingly.

7. In appeal, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the appellant is that no evidence is available on record to establish that the offence was committed by the accused only to depress and victimise a member of scheduled caste, thus, the conviction recorded under Section 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989 is erroneous. It is further submitted that no adequate evidence is available on record for commission of rape by the accused. It is asserted that as per the report given by Forensic Science Laboratory, no semen was found in the swab taken from vulva and the vaginal secretion and this fact is sufficient enough to arrive at the conclusion that the charge pertaining to commission of rape is ill-f