The central legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on victim testimony, corroborated by medical evidence and witness statements, to establish the commission of the offense of rape under Section 376 of IPC.

The learned counsel appearing for the appellant is present and seeks indulgence from this Court for arguing the case. The learned counsel for the appellant is permitted to argue the case.

2. This appeal has been preferred against the Judgment in S.C.No.226 of 2004 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge, Chidambaram. The accused has been charged under Sections 376 and 448 of IPC.

3. The learned Committal Magistrate on appearance of the accused had furnished copies under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. and since the case is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, who had committed under Section 209 of Cr.P.C.. On appearance

before the learned Sessions Judge, the charges under Sections 376 and 448 of IPC, were framed against the accused and when questioned, the accused pleaded not guilty.

4. On the side of the Prosecution , P.Ws 1 to 15 were examined. Exs P1 to P19 were exhibited and M.Os 1 to 5 were marked.

5. According to P.W.1, the mother of the victim, was living with her daughter P.W.2 from the date on which her husband deserted her and at the time of the occurrence, the victim girl P.W.2 was studying in VIII Standard and on 24. 2004 at about 6.00 a.m., P.W.1 had left the house for attending to her work, when she returned to the home, P.W.2 had complained that the accused had committed the offence of rape on her. P.W.5 the neighbour had asked P.W.3 to go and saw what had happened to P.W.2 after hearing her distress call. P.W.3,P.W.4 and P.W.5 who are all neighbours of P.W.1 have seen the accused coming out of the house of P.W.1 and P.W.2 was crying. P.W.6 and P.W.10 have also seen the accused near the house of P.W.1. P.W.1 had preferred a complaint Ex P1 with the All Women Police Station, Chidambaram and had handed over the wearing apparels of P.W.2 viz., M.O2 and M.O.3. The complaint was registered by P.W.15 under All Women Police Station Crime NO.4 of 2004 under Section 376 of IPC . Ex P11 is the First Information Report. P.W.15 had rushed to the place of occurrence at about 12.00 noon on the same day and prepared Ex P4 observation Mahazar in the presence of P.W.8 and P.W.9 and had drawn Ex P12 rough sketch. He had examined witnesses and recorded their statements. The material objects M.O.2 and M.O.3 were seized from the victim girl. P.W.2 had sent them to the Court through Ex P13, Form 95. The victim girl as well as the accused were sent to hospital for subjecting themselves for medical examination under the requisition Ex P14. Ex P15 is the letter of requisition sent by the Court to the Hospital. P.W.12 is the doctor, who had examined the accused and issued Ex P6 Potency Certificate. P.W.2 was examined by the same doctor P.W.12 and Ex P16 is the certificate issued by P.W.12. P.W.13 who had also examined P.W.2 and issued Ex P7 medical report stating that P.W.2 might have been subjected to an offence of rape. Ex P8 is smear report. She has further opined that the hymen of P.W.2 was not in tact. Ex P9 is the age certificate given by P.W.14, the Radiologist on the basis of M.O.4 and M.O.5 X-rays. Ex P10 is the certificate relating to the accused showing the age of the accused as above 20 years. Ex P19 is the Chemical analysts report. After completing the investigation, P.W.15 has filed the charge sheet against the accused.

.6. When incriminating circumstances under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were put to the accused, he would deny his complicity with the crime. After going through the materials available on record before the trial Court by the prosecution including the oral and documentary evidence, the learned trial Judge has come to a conclusion that the offence constituted under Sections 376 and 448 of IPC has been made out against the accused by the prosecution beyond any reasonable doubt and accordingly convicted the accused under Section 376 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo seven years Rigorous imprisonment, and slapped a fine of Rs.1000/-with default sentence and convicted the accused under Section 448 of