The statement of the prosecutrix, if found credible and reliable, requires no corroboration. Punishment should be proportionate to the offence and the court must strike a balance between aggravating and mitigating circumstances in sentencing.

JUDGMENT

N.S. Shekhawat, J. - This judgment shall dispose of above-mentioned two appeals arising out of same impugned judgment. However, for the facility of reference, facts are being taken from CRA-S-719-2019.

2. CRA-S-719-2019 is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 20.11.2018 and order of sentence dated 22.11.2018 passed by the learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court, Chandigarh, whereby the accused/appellant was held guilty for the offence punishable under Section 376(2) IPC and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short 'the POCSO Act') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.

3. The brief facts, as emerged, from the report under Section 173 (Cr.P.C.) are that on 15.10.2014, SI Sarabjit Kaur along with other police officials was present in Police Post, Maloya. At that time the complainant along with her minor daughter came there and got the statement recorded to the effect that she was married and used to clean utensils in the marriage functions. She was having 06 children out of whom 02 were boys and 04 were girls. Her minor daughter (name of the prosecutrix/victim has been withheld in view of the provisions contained in Section 33 of the POCSO Act, Section 228-A of the IPC and in view of the law laid down in the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Karnataka Vs Puttaraja, 2004 (1) RCR (Crl.) 113 and has been referred as the 'victim'), aged 14 1/2 years and was studying in the 7th standard. On the day next to Karvachauth, i.e. 11.10.2014 at about 08.00 PM, the victim left the home without disclosing anything to her family members and they had been searching for her. Even they had lodged DDR No.7 dated 12.10.2014 (Ex.DW2/A) in Police Post, Maloya regarding the said fact. The complainant stated that she had come to know that her daughter, i.e. the victim, had gone with a boy, namely Monu (appellant herein), who was a resident of Shamli and on 14.10.2014, they had gone to Shamli with the police and brought her daughter back from there. Her daughter got her statement recorded that she had gone with accused Monu (appellant) out of her own free will. When the victim went home with her parents, she disclosed that Monu (appellant), who was the nephew of their neighbour Meena, used to come to the house of Meena for the last 7-8 months where the victim also used to sit in the house of Meena and Monu used to have fun with her. One day, the victim was alone in her Jhuggi (hut), where Monu (appellant) came and closed her mouth and forcibly committed rape upon her. Monu told the victim that he would perform marriage with her and in case she disclosed the same to anyone, he would kill her parents, due to which, she was extremely frightened and did not disclose the occurrence to anyone. The victim disclosed to her mother that on the day of Karvachauth, Monu met her in the morning and asked her to come to him at 08.00 PM in the evening with her clothes and they would perform marriage after running away and in case she did not come at 08.00 PM, he would kill her family. After threatening her, he took her to Shamli with an intention to marry her and committed rape against her wishes. With these broad allegations, the FIR in the instant case was registered on 15.10.2014, on the basis of statement of the mother of the victim, i.e. PW-2. After completing necessary investigation, the challan was presented against the appellant (Monu) in the court of competent jurisdiction.

4. Both the parties were granted ample opportunities to lead their respective evidence. In support of the charge, the prosecution examined 11 witnesses including PW-1, the victim, PW-2 Bala (mother of the victim) and PW-5 Dr.Prabhleen, who medico legally examined the victim. The statement of the accused/appellant was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., who stated that the victim was maj