Aditya Nath Mittal,J.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

2. As per prosecution case on 4/5.07.1995 when the prosecutrix was sleeping in her house, at about 3.00 a.m. the appellant had trespassed the house of the complainant and tried to commit rape upon her. The said attempt to rape was resisted by the prosecutrix upon which the accused had caused injuries by knife and upon raising alarm, he had run away. Upon alarm, her mother Smt. Ratana and neighbours Murli had come. Upon an enquiry, she has stated that the accused had attempted to commit rape on her and had run away after causing injury by knife. The report was lodged on the same day at 12.40 hours for the offence punishable under Sections 452, 376/511 and 324 I.P.C. After investigation the charge sheet was filed for the said offences. The appellant was charged for the said offences and he had denied the charges and claimed to face trial.

3. Victim has been examined as PW-1, who has stated that when she was sleeping in her house, the appellant had entered her house at about 3-4 a.m. and attempted to open the 'Nara' of her shalwar. Upon awaking she caught hold the appellant and she raised alarm upon which he had caused injuries to her by knife. Upon her alarm, her mother, brother Lallu Ram had come and the villagers Ram Bhoj and Murli had also come. The complainant has proved the report as Ext. Ka-1 and has stated that the investigating officer had come on the spot and prepared the memo of taking the lantern into his possession, which has been proved as Ext. Ka-2. It is relevant to mention that before any cross examination could be conducted with this witness, this witness has died.

4. Jagdish PW-2 is the father of prosecutrix , who has stated that he had gone to village Madnapur on the date of incident and the incident was narrated by his daughter and he had gone to lodge report, which was got scribed by Rakesh.

5. Lallu Ram P.W. 3 is the brother of the prosecutrix, who has stated that upon alarm, he had reached the spot from his house and he had seen the accused running away from the spot. Murli, Ram Lal and Chhatrapal had come and they tried to catch hold the accused but because he was having knife in his hand, therefore, he was not followed. He has proved the memo of taking torch into possession as Ext. Ka-3.

6. Smt. Ratana P.W. 4 is the mother of the victim, who has stated that she was sleeping in her house and her daughter was sleeping in the courtyard. At about 3.00 a.m. upon alarm of her daughter, she had seen that accused had caught hold her daughter and on her resistance, he had inflicted injury by knife and after that he had run away from the spot. So many persons had come, who had seen the accused in the light of torch.

7. Deputy Superintendent of Police Bhanu Pratap Singh P.W. 5 is the investigating officer of the case, who has proved the investigation and the formal papers of the prosecution. Site plan has been proved as Ext. Ka-4. The memo of lantern Ext. Ka-5, the charge sheet as Ext. Ka-6, Chik F.I.R. as Ext. Ka-7 and the copy of G.D. have been proved as Ext. Ka-8.

8. Dr. V.K.Agarwal P.W. 6 has proved the medical examination of the victim and had found three injuries on the body of the victim. The medical examination report has been proved as Ext. Ka-9. After the prosecution evidence, the statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

9. After appreciation of evidence on record, learned court below came to the conclusion that the appellant is guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 376/ 511, 452 and 324 I.P.C. and accordingly convicted him.

10. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant has been falsely implicated. It has also been submitted that the appellant is the real Bhanja of the father of the victim and due to enmity with the village Pradhan, he has been falsely implicated. It has also been submitted that there is no injury on the private part and the said i