The main legal point established in the judgment is the explanation of delay in lodging the FIR in sexual offence cases and the reliance on the natural conduct of the complainant and the prosecutrix, as well as the reliability of the evidence presented.

Sham Sunder, J

1. This appeal was filed by Gurnam Singh, appellant, who died during the pendency thereof, and Smt. Sudesh, his widow, moved an application for her impleadment as appellant, which was allowed, vide order dated 21.11.2005. She was, thus, permitted to pursue the appeal.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 21.09.1995, and the order of sentence dated 26.09.1995, rendered by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala, vide which it convicted Gurnam Singh, accused, (since deceased), as under :-

Name of the The offence for Sentence awarded

accused (now which conviction was

appellant) recorded.

Gurnam Singh U/S.377/511 IPC Rigorous imprisonment

for five years. Fine

of Rs.500/-. In default

of payment of fine to

undergorigorous imprisonment for one month.

Gurnam Singh U/S 354 IPC Rigorous imprisonment

for two years. Fine

of Rs.500/-. In default

of payment of fine to

undergorigorous imprisonment for one month.

The substantive sentences of the accused were ordered to run concurrently.

3. The FIR was registered, on the basis of the statement of Anuradha,(P.W.-1), wife of Kewal Krishan, resident of Village Dorangla, Police Station Sadar, Gurdaspur, at the relevant time, resident of House. No.315/75, Purana Gadda Khanna, Press Road, Patiala. It was stated by her that she alongwith her daughter, the prosecutrix, aged about 6 years (name being not mentioned in view of the pronouncement of the Apex Court ) had been residing as a tenant, in a room, in the house of Amar Nath Gupta, in the locality, named as Purna Gadda Khanna, Patiala. Accused, Gurnam Singh, who was married, at that time, to the sister of said Amar Nath Gupta, had also been residing, in another portion of the same house. The husband of Anuradha, (PW-1), was not in a fit mental condition, so he was residing, at his native village Dorangla, District Gurdaspur, while she alongwith her sons Vimal Kumar and Amol and daughter , (the prosecutrix), had been living in the ancestral house of Amar Nath Gupta, at Patiala. She was employed in M/s Sohan Hosiery, Darjianwali Gali, Patiala. Her son was employed in M/s Bombay Crockery, Patiala. On 27-5-1994, she and her son Vimal Kumar went to their respective duties. At about 7.00 p.m., they returned to their house. The prosecutrix,(PW-2), told her, that in the afternoon, Amol had gone to the house of Parveen to bring kerosene. The prosecutrix was left alone in the house. Smt. Sudesh, wife of Gurnam Singh, accused,(since deceased) had gone with her children to the Bazar. Gurnam Singh, accused,(since deceased), called the prosecutrix to his room. He inserted his penis, into her mouth, and then tried to insert it into her anus. Some white fluid discharged from the penis of Gurnam Singh. Then he stopped the attempt. He threatened her that, if she disclosed the incident to anybody, he would commit her murder, and the murder of her mother and brothers. On hearing this, Smt. Anuradha, became highly frightened. Due to the sense of shame, she did not disclose the incident to anybody. On 29-5-1994, her brother Vijay Kumar, came to see her, and she narrated this occurrence to him. Her brother accompanied by her and the prosecutrix, went to Police Station Kotwali, Patiala. Smt. Anuradha,(PW-1), made the aforesaid statement, before the Police, on the basis whereof, Daily Diary Report was recorded in the Roznamcha on 29.05.1994. The prosecutrix was subjected to medical examination on the same day i.e. 29.05.1994. The statement of the prosecutrix was recorded, on 30-5-2009, in which, she narrated the version, stated above by her mother. She further stated that Gurnam Singh, accused made her to lie down and tried to insert his penis into her private parts and into her anus. She further stated that when white fluid discharged from his penis, he stopped his attempt. On the basis of the aforesaid DDR, the FIR, was recorded. On 30-5- 1994, the prosecutrix w