The court upheld the conviction for rape of a minor, emphasizing that delays in FIR do not invalidate the prosecution's case if justified, and the victim's testimony remains credible despite inconsistencies.

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.

1. Heard Shri Akshay Raj Singh, holding brief of Shri Ajay Sengar, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri L.D. Rajbhar, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. Present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 24.07.2017 passed by Sri Shailoj Chandra, Additional Sessions Judge/FTC, Court No. 1 Hamirpur in Sessions Trial No. 74 of 2011 arising out of Case Crime No. 1989 of 2009 under Sections 376 IPC , Police Station Sumerpur, District Hamirpur, whereby the learned trial Court has convicted the appellant and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment and has imposed fine Rs. 30,000/- for the offence under Section 376 IPC and in default of payment of that fine, to further undergo imprisonment of two years. Half amount of the fine has been directed to be paid to the victim.

3. The prosecution story emerged on the FIR dated 10.12.2009 in Case Crime No. 1989 of 2009 lodged on 10.12.2009 at about 12.20 noon with respect to occurrence caused on 08.12.2009 in the evening. The FIR is Ex.Ka-9 at the trial. It was lodged on the Written Report of that date submitted by ‘M’ father of the victim girl ‘X’, aged about 8 years. The Written Report is Ex.Ka-1 at the trial. Thus, it has been narrated, on 08.12.2009, in the evening, ‘X’ had gone to pick ‘ber’ fruit. When she reached near the field of one Vinod Singh, the present appellant Lakhan Singh @ Lakhna grabbed her and forcibly took her to a nearby field and committed rape on her. The victim returned home in the night and narrated that occurrence. On 10.12.2009, the victim ‘X’ was medically examined by Dr. Kiran Sachan (P.W.-6 at the trial). In that she noted following injuries suffered by the victim, were noted:

“Hymen torn at places-post cervix-torn (skin) upto the anus antibiotic ointment applied bleed + swab taken and send to pathologist for the preservence of sperm in the seimen Nor age determination she is referred to CMO Opinion-Injury by blunt object .”

4. That medical examination report is Ex.Ka-5 at the trial. Supplementary Medical Report was prepared reporting that no spermatozoa was seen on the slides, however plenty red blood cells were noted. The age of the victim was recorded to be about 10 years. That report submitted by Dr. Kiran Sachan is Ex.Ka-6 at the trial.

5. On 11.12.2009, the clothing worn by the victim ‘X’ at the time of occurrence was recovered by S.I. Shiv Prasad (P.W.-5 at the trial). That Recovery Memo is Ex.Ka-2 at the trial.

6. On 14.12.2009, undergarments of the present appellant were also recovered. That Recovery Memo prepared by S.I. Shiv Prasad is Ex.Ka-4 at the trial.

7. With respect to the recovery of the garments of the appellant and the victim including their undergarments, forensic report was obtained. In that, presence of spermatozoa was noted on the undergarments of the appellant and victim ‘X’. On the undergarments of ‘X’, large number of human blood spots were found present. That report dated 04.02.2010 is Ex. Ka-11 at the trial.

8. Investigation was conducted and completed by the Investigating Officer, Mohd. Sharif Khan (P.W.-8 at the trial). Accordingly, charge sheet was submitted. Upon case being committed for trial to the Court of Sessions, following charge was framed against the appellant:

9. At the trial, besides the above documentary evidence, prosecution led oral evidence of the first informant ‘M’ (P.W.-1 at the trial); victim ‘X’ examined as P.W.-2; ‘A’ a friend of victim ‘X’ examined as P.W.-3 and ‘V’ mother of ‘X’ examined as P.W.-4.

10. Thereafter S.I. Shiv Prasad (P.W.-5) proved the recoveries. Dr. Kiran Sachan (P.W.-6) proved the medical examination of ‘X’ and the injuries suffered by her as also her opinion with respect to commission of rape; Constable Deen Dayal was examined as P.W.-7 to prove the GD entries and the preparation of check FIR. Last, Mohd. Sharif Khan (P.W.-8) proved the investigation.

11. Upon conclusion of prosecution evidence, statement of the accused- ap