JUDGMENT :

This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 28.06.2003 and order of sentence dated 30.06.2003 passed by the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge-IV, Dhanbad in S.T. Case No.313 of 2000, arising out of Putki P.S. Case No.83 of 2000 dated 10.07.2000, corresponding to G.R. No.2012 of 2000, whereby and where under, the learned court below has convicted the sole appellant for the offence punishable under Sections 376/511 of the IPC and further sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years.

2. Briefly stating the prosecution case as unveiled in the written application of the informant Chandrawati Devi addressed the officer in-charge of P.S. Putki, district-Dhanbad on 10.07.2000 is as under;

The informant Chandrawati (PW-6) alleged in the said written application that on 7.07.2000 (Friday) at about 2.00 pm in the afternoon, she was cleaning wheat, when her daughter (victim, hereinafter referred as “victim”: name is withheld), aged about seven years came crying to her and told to her that Baiju Chacha (appellant) had called her to his house asking her to give a sum of Rs.5/- and after taking her away to his house, she forcefully laid her down on the floor and after undressing her garments, started committing rape with her, upon which she became restless and the stomach was aching, thereupon, she cried and asked him as to what was he doing to her and when she screamed loudly, Baiju Chacha left her. It was further disclosed by the informant that the said Baiju Chacha warned her daughter not to disclose this incident to anyone and thereafter her daughter came back to her house screamingly. The informant further stated in her written application that after taking the entire information from her daughter (victim), she disclosed all these facts to her neighbour Rajkalia Devi (PW-4) and Rajesh Thakur (PW-1) and she was advised by them that let her husband (father of the victim) came back to the village, who had gone on 3.07.2000 to his native house for four days. She further stated that today was the 10.07.2000 in the morning and when her husband did not come back, then she herself came to the police station and informed about the incident.

It is further claimed by informant that Baiju Ram Rawani (appellant) took her daughter, aged seven years to his house and forcibly committed rape. She also stated that father of Baiju Ram Rawani was working as a mechanic in a colliery.

3. On the basis of the aforesaid written application, a formal FIR was drawn by the Putki police station vide P.S. Case No.83 of 2000 dated 10.07.2000 for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the IPC and the investigation of this case commenced.

After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was submitted and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions and the learned Trial Court after framing the charge for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the IPC, concluded the trial and found the sole appellant guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 376/511 of the IPC and awarded the sentence for rigorous imprisonment for five years, which is under challenge in the form of this appeal.

4. Heard Sri Pankaj Kumar, appearing on behalf of the sole appellant and Mr. V.S. Sahay, learned counsel for the State.

Arguments on behalf of the learned counsel for appellant

5. Assailing the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the defence counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that the impugned judgment suffers from infirmity, as apparent on face of it, the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence is based on wrong appreciation of the evidences and finding is totally misconceived and erroneous.

It has been pointed out by learned defence counsel that PW – 6 is the mother of the victim and informant in this case and she had stated in her deposition that she waited for about four days before instituting this case awaiting arrival of her husband (father of the victim), who