SANJAY KAROL, J.

1. The following important issues arise for consideration in the present appeal : (a) As to whether the witnesses, being minors, were competent to testify in the Court in terms of Section 118 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (hereinafter referred to as the Evidence Act) and their depositions considered for examining the guilt of the accused; (b) As to whether their testimonies necessarily required corroboration; and (c) As to whether testimonies of the mothers of the victims can be considered, applying the doctrine of res gestae, in view of Section 6 of the Evidence Act.

2. The appellant stands convicted on the testimonies of child witnesses, three in number and their mothers, four in number, based on the corroborative medical evidence. The correctness of the reasoning and the findings returned by the trial judge are subject matter of consideration before us.

3. Accused-appellant Himanshu alias Shammi (hereinafter referred to as accused) has preferred the present appeal, laying challenge to the judgment dated 31.8.2016, passed by Special Judge, Chamba, Division Chamba, Himachal Pradesh, in Sessions Trial No.20 of 2015, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh v.