School records' date of birth entries admissible but not conclusive proof of age without evidence of basis; prosecution must prove victim's minority beyond reasonable doubt for statutory rape conviction in consensual relations cases.

JUDGMENT :

SANJAY DHAR, J.

1) The appellant has challenged judgment dated 12.03.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Kulgam (hereinafter referred to as “the trial court”), whereby he has been convicted for offence under Section 376 RPC. Challenge has also been thrown to order dated 14.03.2025, passed by the trial court, whereby the appellant has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of eight years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/ for commission of offence under Section 376 RPC. In default of payment of fine, the appellant has been directed to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months.

2) Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that on 07.12.2018, Police Station, Yaripora received a written report from PW-1 Abdul Aziz Dar, alleging therein that his daughter, Ms. X, had left home at about 5 p.m. on the previous day in connection with making purchases from the market but in the meanwhile she was kidnapped by the appellant/accused. It was further reported that despite making strenuous efforts to locate the prosecutrix, her whereabouts could not be traced.

3) On the basis of aforesaid report of PW-1, FIR No.92/2018 for offences under Section 363, 109 RPC came to be registered at Police Station, Yaripora, and investigation was set into motion. During the course of investigation, the police recovered the prosecutrix from custody of the appellant from a place named Shirpora Dal. The prosecutrix was subjected to medical checkup and after obtaining the medical opinion, offence under Section 376 was added. The statement of the prosecutrix under Section 161 of Cr. P. C and under Section 164A of Cr. P. C was recorded during the course of investigation and the statements of other witnesses acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case were also recorded. It was found that co-accused Shabir Ahmad Bhagat and Ghulam Mohi-ud-din Bhagat had aided and assisted the appellant in commission of the crime. The date of birth certificate of the prosecutrix was obtained from the school where she had studied and her age was found to be less than 18 years. It was also found that the prosecutrix was pregnant carrying a foetus of 36 weeks. After investigation of the case, offences under Section 363/376 RPC were found established against the appellant and the challan against him as well as against co-accused was laid before the trial court.

4) On 23.07.2019, charges for offences under Section 363, 376 RPC were framed against the appellant and his plea was recorded. The appellant denied the charges and claimed to be tried. Accordingly, the prosecution was directed to adduce evidence in support of its case.

5) In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined as many as 11 out of 12 witnesses cited in the challan. Besides examining the prosecutrix, the other material witnesses who were examined by the prosecution included father of the prosecutrix, PW-1 Abdul Aziz Dar, PW-2 Mohammad Ayoub Allie, PW-3 Mohammad Yousuf Dar, PW-4 Lali Jan (elder sister of the prosecutrix), PW-5 Constable Zahoor Ahmad, PW-6 Constable Irshad Ahmad, PW-7 Muzaffar Ahmad Paul, Teacher Govt. High School Kujjar, PW-8 Mst. Rani Mehak, PW-9 Dr. Shabeena Medical Officer, PW-10 Dr. Rafia Medical Officer and PW-12 Inspector Ather Samad, the Investigating Officer.

6) After completion of the prosecution evidence, the statement of the appellant and co-accus