JUDGMENT :

Rameshwar Vyas, J.

1. The instant appeal under Section 374 (2) Cr.P.C. has been preferred by appellant Dalla Ram being aggrieved by the judgment dated 3.9.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge, Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act-2012 and Commission For Protection of Child Rights Act 2005, Balotra, in Sessions Case No. 63/2019 (CIS No. 63/2019), whereby he has been convicted and sentenced as below:

2. As per prosecution story, on 10.9.2019 at 2:39 PM, Binjaram complainant/father of the prosecutrix (PW-2) submitted a written report (Exhibit-P/8) before Station House Officer, Police Station Gida, Barmer to the effect that on 10.9.2019 at 7:00 AM, while his daughter, aged about 16 years, was returning from Bada (the place where cattles are kept) after milking of goats, she was raped by Dalla Ram. On hearing screams, the complainant went towards Bada, Dalla Ram fled away on seeing complainant. On asking, his daughter told him that she has been raped. She narrated the whole story to her father. The complainant called the responsible persons from the village and shown them the place of incident. Thereafter, they went to the house of Dalla Ram. On asking, Dalla Ram replied that he will behave in the same way.

3. On filing the above written report, First Information Report was registered for the offence under Section 376(1) of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (herein afterwards referred to as 'POCSO Act'). After registering the FIR, the investigation was carried.

4. During investigation, apart from routine investigation, necessary samples were collected and sent for examination to State Forensic Science Laboratory, Rajasthan. DNA report was also obtained from the FSL. As per result of examination, the DNA profile obtained from blood sample of victim and blood sample of accused were accounted in the same DNA profile obtained from underwear of victim and Salwar of victim. The conclusion of the FSL reads as under:-

"On the basis of the DNA test, it is concluded that the source of DNA profile obtained from exhibit no. 1 (Underwear of victim) and 2 (Salwar of victim) is matching with the source of DNA profile obtained exhibit no. 10 (Blood sample of accused.)"

5. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet against the accused appellant was filed for the offences under Section 376(1) of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act before the Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases, Balotra. During trial, accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

6. In support of its case, the prosecution examined total sixteen witnesses and exhibited thirty-three documents. When confronted with the prosecution evidence, accused appellant stated that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further stated that no sample was taken during his examination. After completion of trial, the learned trial court convicted and sentenced the accused appellant as mentioned above.

7. Aggrieved with the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence, appellant has filed the instant appeal before this Court.

8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record as well as the impugned judgment.

9. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that learned trial court has convicted the accused appellant without any evidence against him. All material witnesses including the prosecutrix had been declared hostile by the prosecution. The prosecutrix did not support the case of the prosecution, however, learned trial court considering the minor age of the prosecutrix, report of DNA Examination and statement recorded un