The testimony of a victim in a sexual offence case may serve as the sole basis for a conviction if the evidence is found to be wholly reliable, credible, and inspires confidence. Corroboration is a matter of judicial prudence rather than a mandatory requirement of law.

JUDGMENT :

JAI KRISHNA UPADHYAY, J.

1. This criminal appeal has been preferred by the accused appellant against the judgment and order dated 24.8.2018 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge-VIII/, Special Judge (POCSO Act), Muzaffarnagar in Special Session Trial No. 151 of 2015 (State vs. Kiranpal @ Kiran), arising out of Case Crime No. 660 of 2014, Police Station Nai Mandi, District Muzaffarnagar, convicting the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 323 of IPC and 5/6 POCSO Act and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment of life and a fine of Rs. 25,000/- under Section 6 POCSO Act and to undergo six months imprisonment for the offence under Section 323 of IPC.

2. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently with default clause.

3. The facts of the case, in nutshell, as unfolded by the informant Tejvir Singh son of Samey Singh in the First Information Report (in short 'F.I.R.') are that in the night of 8/9.7.2014, the informant along with his wife Nirmala was sleeping near the animals and inside the house, the informant’s sister, Satviri was sleeping with her children Komal and Chhotu and the informant's daughter, victim, who was about 10 years old. During the night, an unidentified individual abducted the daughter of the informant. In the morning, when victim was not found on her cot, the informant and his family members searched for her and at about 5:30 AM, the informant's neighbor, Ompal Prajapati, brought the victim home and reported that he had found the girl near the school and he noted that her condition was poor and it appeared that the child had been raped and subjected to physical injury.

4. On the basis of the written report (Ext. ka-1), chik First Information Report was registered at Police Station concerned on 9.7.2014 as Case Crime No. 660 of 2014, under Sections 376, 323 IPC and ¾ POCSO Act. After lodging of the FIR, the informant gave another report (tehrir) to the effect that in the night of 8/9.7.2014, he had filed a complaint against unknown persons regarding the rape and physical assault of her daughter, victim. On July 9, 2014, when his daughter regained consciousness, she uttered the name "Kiran." He then asked her whether the incident had been perpetrated by Kiran, Sukhbir's son-in-law, who belongs to the ‘Bhangi’ community. Upon hearing this, tears welled up in his daughter's eyes, and she lost consciousness once again. He was now fully convinced that the crime was committed by Kiran, who resides right in his neighborhood. It was also possible that another young man was involved in the incident alongwith him.

5. Investigation in the matter was initiated by S.I. Jitendra Kumar Sharma. He inspected the place of occurrence and prepared site plan (Ext. ka-8). The Investigating Officer recorded the statement of the witnesses. Injured was medically examined and injury report was prepared. Statements of the victim under Sections 161 and 164 CrPC were also recorded. Memo in regard to pant shirt and underwear of the accused and kurti and salwar of the victim was prepared and sent for FSL. Memo in regard to plain soil and bloodstained soil was also prepared and the same were also sent for FSL.

6. On medical examination of the victim, following internal injuries were found :

“1. Both labia minora were red from the inner side.

2. Redness was present on the vestibule.

3. Hymen 'vaginal membrane' was lacerated at