The court emphasized the need to carefully consider the entire testimony of a victim, especially in cases where the victim may have limited understanding or education. The judgment also clarified the requirements for establishing an offence under Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act.

JUDGMENT :

1. This appeal is by the accused Puttu Lal challenging his conviction and sentence vide order dated 27.01.2014, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Pilibhit in Sessions Trial No. 213 of 2012 arising out of Case Crime No. 111 of 2012, under Sections 376, 352 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act, Police Station Neoriya, District Pilibhit; whereby he has been sentenced to life imprisonment alongwith fine of Rs. 10,000/- coupled with a default sentence of one year rigorous imprisonment under Section 376 IPC read with Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act and under Section 352 three months rigorous imprisonment alongwith fine of Rs. 500/- coupled with a default sentence of fifteen days.

2. Prosecution case in brief is that father of the victim namely, Kalicharan made a written report stating that he belongs to scheduled caste and his 14 year old daughter (victim) was going to pluck garlic at about 2.00 in the afternoon on 10.3.2012 and when she was crossing the house of the accused Puttu Lal, he forcibly dragged the victim to his house and subjected her to sexual assault. The victim on return informed such facts to the parents who complained to the accused who hurled abuses and were adamant to physically assault them. Request was thus made to register the case and take necessary steps in the matter, as per law. Taking note of such contention in the written report, contents whereof incorporated in the General Diary, Case Crime No. 111 of 2012 came to be registered under Sections 376, 352, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(2) (v) SC/ST Act at Police Station Neoriya, District Pilibhit against the accused appellant.

3. The statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. wherein she supported the prosecution case, as per which, the accused dragged her inside the house and took-off her clothes and sexually assaulted her. On return the victim informed the incident to her aunt and parents. The victim was medically examined at 3.05 PM on 12th March, 2012, wherein no signs of external injury was found on the victim. No injury on the private parts of the victim was found either. Slides of vaginal smears were prepared of the victim and sent for pathological report. A supplementary medical report has been given by the doctor on 14.3.2012, as per which, the vaginal smear was negative for spermatozoa (alive or dead) and the victim was found not to be above 18 years of age. The report has also been placed on record, as per which, no dead or alive spermatozoa was found in the vaginal smear. Statement of witnesses were recorded whereafter a charge-sheet came to be filed against the accused Puttu Lal, under Sections 376, 352, 504, 506 IPC read with Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act.

4. The Magistrate took cognizance upon the charge-sheet and committed the case to the Court of Sessions wherein charges were framed against the accused appellant under Sections 337, 352, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act. The accused appellant was explained the charges levelled against him, who denied the accusations and demanded trial. The trial accordingly commenced in which prosecution has adduced following documentary evidence:

5. Two witnesses of fact have also been adduced, namely Kalicharan (PW-1), who happens to be the father of the victim and the victim (PW-2).

6. PW-1 in his examination-in-chief has supported the prosecution case. He has stated that accused is a rowdy element and due to his fear the FIR could be lodged the next day. However, in the cross-examination, this witness h