Victim's credible testimony in sexual offence cases suffices despite minor discrepancies from cross-examination/illiteracy, FIR delay in conservative society, absent injuries; corroborated by matching slipper recovery; non-exam of repetitive witnesses justified.

JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.

The present appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 28.03.2013 and order of sentence dated 30.03.2013, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P. (learned Trial Court) (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)

2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the police presented a challan against the accused before the learned Trial Court for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 452 and 376 read with Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It was asserted that the victim (name being withheld to protect her identity) was sleeping in her room on 21.06.2009 with her husband, who was hard of hearing. She had kept the door open because of the summer season. The accused opened the drawstring of her Salwar at about 2:00 a.m. and dragged her out of the room. She shouted for help. The accused ran away from the spot, but left his slippers. The victim’s son and other persons arrived on the spot. The victim narrated the incident to them. She went to Pardhan, who advised her to file a complaint before the Police. The victim reported the incident to the police, who registered the F.I.R. (Ex.PW1-A).

3. SI Dharam Singh (PW-4) investigated the matter. He went to the spot, took the photographs and prepared the spot map (Ex. PW-4/A). The victim produced one V-shaped slipper and her salwar. These were put in the separate parcels, and each parcel was sealed with six seal impressions of seal ‘A’.The seal impression ‘A’ was taken on a separate piece of cloth (Ex.PW-4/F). The parcels were seized vide memo (Ex.PW-4/B). The accused was arrested on 25.06.2009. He made a disclosure statement (Ex.PW-4/C) that he could get the other slipper recovered. The accused got recovered a V-shaped slipper, which was put in a cloth parcel, and the parcel was sealed with six seal impressions of seal ‘P’. The parcel was seized vide seizure memo (Ex.PW-4/E). Specimen seal impression‘P’ was taken on a separate piece of cloth(Ex.PW-4/G). The spot map (Ex.PW-4/L) of the place of the recovery was prepared. Medical examination of the accused was conducted, and a report (Ex.PA) was issued. SI Dharam Singh filed an application (Ex.PW-4/H) before the Secretary, Gram Panchayat Taroh, for obtaining a copy of the Pariwar Register. The copy of the Pariwar Register (Ex.PW-4/J) was seized vide memo (Ex.PW-4/K). The case property was sent to the State Forensic Science Laboratory (SFSL), Junga and a report (Ex.PW-4/M) was issued stating that the slipper produced by the victim and got recovered by the accused could have been used by a single person. The statements of proseuction witnesses were recorded as per their version. After the completion of the investigation, the challan was prepared and presented before the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Mandi, who committed it to the Court of Sessions for t