1. Mr. Amit Kumar Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the objector in the present case, has not appeared despite repeated calls.

2. Though the matter is listed for hearing on I.A.No.02/2024 application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail, but considering the fact that the appellant is in jail since 3.4.2022, this Court proceeds to hear the appeal finally.

3. The criminal appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 12.01.2024 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/First F.T.S.C, Bilaspur in Special Sessions Case (POCSO Act) No.62/2022, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced in the following manner :

4. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on the night of 16.01.2022 the complainant and her family members had dinner and went to sleep. At approximately 12 A.M., the complainant woke up to go to the bathroom and saw that her daughter/victim was not at home. When the victim was not found after searching everywhere in the house, in the neighbourhood and among relatives and nearby, the complainant/mother of the victim lodged the FIR in Crime No.66/2022 for offence under Section 363 of the IPC at Police Station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur vide Ex.P-1 on the basis of missing report vide Ex.P-37. Spot map was prepared by the investigating officer vide Ex.P-2. Recovery panchnama was prepared vide Ex.P-3. Statement of the victim was recorded under Section 161 CrPC vide Ex.P-4. Consent for medical examination was obtained vide Ex.P-5. Statement of the victim under Section 164 CrPC was recorded by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur vide Ex.P-7 and P-7A. MLC of the victim was conducted vide Ex.P-11 in which the doctor has found no injury. Patwari also prepared the spot map vide Ex.P-14. The appellant was arrested on 02.04.2022 vide arrest memo Ex.P-16. The appellant was also examined by the doctor vide Ex.P-18 in which the appellant was found capable to commit intercourse. Underwear and vaginal slides of the victim were seized vide Ex.P-19. Certified copy of dakhil kharij register was seized vide Ex.P-27C. Entry form of the victim was seized vide Ex.P-30C. Underwear of the appellant was seized vide Ex.P-36. Seized articles were sent to FSL for chemical examination and as per FSL report (Ex.P-42), semen stains and human sperm were found on underwear Article A seized from the victim and underwear Article C seized from the appellant. After completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was filed before the jurisdictional criminal Court.

5. The trial Court has framed charges against the appellant under Sections 363, 366, 376(3), 376(2)(n) of the IPC and Section 5(l)/6 of POCSO Act. The appellant abjured his guilt and pleaded innocence.

6. In order to establish the charge against the appellant, the prosecution examined 18 witnesses. The statement of the appellant under Section 313 of the CrPC was also recorded in which he denied the material appearing against him and stated that he is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the case. After appreciation of evidence available on record, the learned trail Court has convicted the accused/appellant and sentenced him as mentioned in para 3 of the judgment. Hence, this appeal.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the prosecution has failed to prove the case against the appellant beyond reasonable doubts. There is no legally admissible evidence with regard to the age of the victim that on the date of incident she was minor and less than 18 years of age. In absence of examination of author of the dakhil-kharij register, the same cannot be taken into consideration for determination of age of the victim. Dakhil-kharij register is a weak type of evidence. No any Kotwari register or ossification report are produced by the prosecution to determine the actual age of the victim that on the date of incident she was below 18 years of age. It is further argued by the learned counsel for the appellan