JUDGMENT

P. K. TRIPATHY, J. — This appeal has been filed by the appellant challenging the order of conviction for the offence under Sec. 376, IPC in S.T.No. 15/134 of 1993 in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Balasore for his conviction under Sec. 376, IPC, appellant has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-. It has been ordered that if the fine shall be paid the entire sum shall be paid to the prose¬cutrix (P.W.No. 5). That order of conviction was passed on July 20th 1994 and the appellant as stated by learned counsel for the appellant was an under trial prisoner. Therefore, it is stated at the Bar that the appellant has already suffered the imprisonment as per the impugned judgment.

2. While challenging the order of conviction Mr. S.K.Tripathy addressing the Court on behalf of Mr. D.P.Dhal argues that even if the entire logic adopted by the trial Court is correct, then also on a reference to the evidence of the prosecutrix (P.W.6) and the Doctor (P.W.No. 8) and the medical report Ext. 5, that does not make out a case of rape as defined in Section 375, IPC and punishable under Sec. 376 (1), IPC and therefore appellant’s conviction is l