Hon’ble Ram Krishna Gautam, J.—This appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the person convicted and sentenced in S.T. No. 257 of 2003 under Section 376(2), 323 I.P.C., P.S. Surajpur, of Sessions Division Gautam Buddh Nagar, through Superintendent Jail, Agra, under Section 383 Cr.P.C. as Jail Appeal against the judgment dated 30.1.2006 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C. No. 1, Gautam Buddh Nagar, wherein learned Additional Sessions Judge has convicted appellant Ram Pravesh for the offence punishable under Section 376(2), 323 I.P.C. related with Case Crime No. 30 of 2003, P.S. Surajpur, District Gautam Buddh Nagar, and thereby sentenced him for life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 10,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 376(2) I.P.C. and simple imprisonment of six months for the offence punishable under Section 323 I.P.C. In case of failure of payment of fine, convict was to further undergo simple imprisonment of six months. He was acquitted for the charge of offence punishable under Section 308 I.P.C.

2. In brief the contention of memorandum of appeal is that the learned Additional Sessions Judge has failed to consider the facts and law placed before it. Evidence were not properly appreciated. The legal propositions were not taken care of. There were contradictions in the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses and the prosecution has utterly failed to prove its case. There was no mark of injury over private part of the prosecutrix, hence the offence punishable under Section 376(2) I.P.C. was not made out. There was no trustworthiness of prosecution witnesses. No independent witnesses were examined, rather the witnesses examined were interested witnesses. Prosecution witness No. 2 Km. Anju has not corroborated the prosecution version. The appellant, being a poor person, is languishing in jail since 23.4.2003, hence this appeal for setting aside the judgment of conviction and sentencing made therein.

3. Heard Ms. Kanchan Chaudhary, learned Amicus Curiae, for the appellant, and Sri Udit Chandra, learned AGA, for the State and have gone through the judgment and the record of the case.

4. From the perusal of the record it is apparent that Case Crime No. 30 of 2003, under Section 376, 323 I.P.C. was got registered at Police station Surajpur, District Gautam Buddh Nagar, on 8.4.2003 at 17.35 hours, upon the report of Baleshwar, son of Sri Ram, resident of village Shahadra, P.S. Surajpur, District Gautam Buddh Nagar, against Ram Pravesh, son of Ramphool, resident of Garhi Shahadra, P.S. Surajpur, District Gautam Buddh Nagar, with the allegation that the complainant Baleshwar had gone to Faridabad on 7.4.2003 for having medicines of his mother. His wife and two daughters i.e. Anju aged about 12 years and Mona aged about 5 years were at their home. When he came back in late hours his wife Jaymala apprised him that his both the daughters were at the field at about 1.30 P.M. to ease and the elder one came back to her, under weeping position, who narrated that Mona was dragged by Ram Pravesh of village Garhi Shahadra in the field of one Jai. She instantly rushed to the spot and found that Mona was put under naked position by Ram Pravesh, who himself was naked and was committing rape with her. She gave a blow of a danda to him and in response he assaulted her and Anju too was beaten by him while Mona was caught by her and rescue call was made then Ram Pravesh ran away from the spot. This occurrence of commission rape was witnessed by the complainant’s wife herself and some other had seen him while running from the spot, hence this report for taking legal recourse. The investigation proceeded. Clothes of Km. Mona were taken in possession. They were sealed. Medico legal examination of Anju, Mona and Smt. Jaymala were got done on the letter of the Station Officer concerned. They were referred for ossification test. Their reports including pathological report and ossification test reports were obtained