The testimony of the prosecutrix alone can form the basis of conviction if found reliable, and absence of injuries on the person of the prosecutrix does not necessarily indicate consent or falsity of the allegation of rape.

Sushma Shrivastava, J.

1. Appellant has preferred this appeal challenging his conviction and order of sentence passed by First Addl. Sessions Judge, Balaghat in S.T. No. 96/93, decided on 04.01.96.

2. Appellant has been convicted under Section 450, 376 of IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years for each of the offences, by the impugned judgment. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently

3. According to prosecution, on 16.1.93 about 12 O'clock in the noon at village Parsatola, when prosecutrix was all alone in the house, her parents and other family members having gone to work in the field, Appellant Nanhu, who lived in the neighbouring house, came to the house of the prosecutrix and caught hold of her. Appellant proposed her for sex, but she declined, then he forcibly dragged her inside the house, prosecutrix pushed him, but he overpowered her and bit her on her cheeks, fell her on the ground, undressed her and committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. On her screaming, the uncle and cousin sister of the prosecutrix, namely, Bhandari and Sevanta came there, then Appellant fled away. Prosecutrix went to the Police Station alongwith her parents, uncle and sister Sevanta and lodged the FIR at Police Station Kirnapur, District Balaghat. On the basis of her report, an offence was registered against the Appellant and was investigated. Prosecutrix was sent for medical examination. On being arrested, Appellant was also sent for medical examination. The saree, and vaginal slide of the prosecutrix collected during her medical examination as well as the underwear and blood stained shirt of the Appellant, and his pubic hair were seized by the Police. The broken bangles and earthen pot broken at the time of incident were also seized by the Police. The seized articles were sent for forensic examination. After due investigation, Appellant was prosecuted under Section 376, 324 and 448 of IPC and was put to trial.

4. Appellant denied the charges framed against him under Sections 450, 376 and 324 of IPC, and pleaded false implication.

5. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, after trial and upon appreciation of the evidence adduced in the case, acquitted the Appellant of the charge under Section 324 of IPC, but found him guilty under Sections 450 and 376 of IPC for committing rape with the prosecutrix in her house, convicted and sentenced him as aforesaid, by the impugned judgment, which has been challenged in this appeal.

6. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the trial court did not appreciate the evidence properly and erroneously convicted the Appellant on the basis of unreliable testimony of the prosecutrix without any medical corroboration. Learned Counsel for the Appellant further submitted that the trial court failed to consider that the prosecutrix was a major girl, as also married, and her conduct revealed that she was a consenting party.

7. Learned Counsel for the State, on the other hand, justified and supported the conviction of the Appellant.

8. Perused the evidence on record. Prosecutrix (P.W-1) deposed in her evidence that at the relevant time she had come to her house after working in the field, gave food to her niece and after leaving her for playing when she came back to her house and tried to close the doors, Appellant caught hold of her from the back and dragged her; prosecutrix pushed the Appellant, as a result, he dashed against an earthen pot, which was broken into pieces, but he again used force to her and committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. According to prosecutrix (P.W-1), at the time of incident she was all alone in her house, her parents having gone to the field, and when she screamed her uncle Bhandari and cousin Sevanta Bai had come to her, but by that time, Appellant had already ravished her.

9. Prosecutrix (P.W-1) further deposed that after the incident, her cousin sister had called her parents and she had gone to the Police Station with them about 2 O'cloc