Corroboration of the prosecutrix's statement by medical evidence and lack of a cogent defense influenced the court's decision in convicting the appellant under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

JUDGMENT

R.L. Anand, J. - This is a criminal appeal and has been directed against the judgment and order dated 22.4.1995, passed by the Court of Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Gurgaon, who convicted the appellant Javed alias Jahid under Section 376, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for a period of 10 years. The appellant was further directed to pay a fine of Rs. 1,500/-; in default of payment of fine, he was directed to undergo R.I. for one month. It was further ordered by the trial court that out of the fine, if realised, a sum of Rs. 1,000/- shall be paid to the prosecutrix by way of compensation.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 14.4.1992, at about 12 Noon, complainant Parvina aged about 11/12 years, lodged a report with the police stating that her parents were residing in a rented house in Village Choma. On that date, at about 8 AM, her mother Hasina and father Kallu had left the house for doing the work. Her younger sister Samina and brother Dilsad had gone out of the house to attend a feast. Appellant Javed was a relative of their neighbour; her mother had left him in the house for ironing the clothes. She was lying on the cot. When she was asleep, appellant Javed caught hold of her hands and tied them with a rope. She woke up and asked Jave as to what he was doing. Javed asked her to keep quiet. He tied her both hands and put a cloth in her mouth. He opened her salwar. He also applied mustard oil at her vagina. After removing her clothes, he raped her. She became unconscious. After she became conscious, she found that the room was closed. She started crying upon which a lady from the neighbourhood reached there after opening the door from outside. She told that she was raped by Javed. In the meantime, her brother and sister also reached there after attending the feast. She asked her sister Samina to call her mother. Her mother reached there and she narrated the whole story to her. A case under Section 376, Indian Penal Code, was registered and the accused was arrested. After the completion of the investigation, he was challaned to face trial. The case was committed to the court of Sessions at Gurgaon vide order dated 12.8.1992, passed by the Addl. C.J.M., Gurgaon.

3. Accused was charge-sheeted under Section 376, Indian Penal Code, vide order dated 21.2.1994. The charge was read over and explained to the appellant to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

4. In order to prove the charges, the prosecution examined Dr. Suresh Sharma, PW-1, Dr. R.K. Marwaha, PW-2, Parvina, Prosecutrix, PW-3, Hasina, PW-4, Dr. Rajni Prashar, PW-5, SI Ishwar Singh, PW-6, Pyare Lal, PW-7 and Mool Chand Punia, PW-8.

5. On the closure of the prosecution evidence, the statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313, Criminal Procedure Code, and all the incriminating circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence were put to him. Accused denied those circumstances and his plea was that he has been falsely implicated. It was also pleaded by Javed that economic condition of Kallu, father of Parvina, prosecutrix, was very weak and he had asked him to give a loan of Rs. 200/-. He refused to oblige him and because of that reason he has been falsely implicated in this case.

6. In defence, the appellant did not lead any evidence and closed the case.

7. The learned trial court convicted and sentenced the appellant in the manner stated above and aggrieved by his conviction and sentence, the present appeal, which I am disposing of with the assistance rendered by Mr. T.S. Sangha, counsel for the appellant and Mr. Shailender Singh, DAG, Haryana, appearing on behalf of the State and with their assistance have gone through the record of this case.

8. Prosecutirix Parvina was a girl of 11/12 years of age at the time of the incident. She has corroborated her allegations. According to her on the date of occurrence at about 9 AM when she was asleep on a cot in her house and was alone, appellant came there. He wa