The conviction can be based on the testimony of the prosecutrix if it is trustworthy, even if medical evidence does not support the claim.

1. After having been convicted under S.376/451, RPC, the appellant (for short to be referred to as 'accused') has preferred the instant appeal against the judgment of learned Sessions Judge, Leh - Ladakh dated 23-3-2004. He has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- under S.376, RPC, in default thereof to further under - go rigorous imprisonment for one year and under S.451, RPC, the sentence awarded is rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and fine of Rs. 1,000/-. In default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. However, both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

2. The prosecutrix (name not being disclosed) in this case is the wife of P.W. Tundup Dorjay. He is the complainant also. The date of incident is of 29-3-2002 at about 11 a.m. in the house of the complainant falling within the jurisdiction of Police Station Leh. The written report Ex P.W. 1 was lodged on 30-3-2002 at about 6 p.m. on the basis of which formal FIR No. 30/2002 was registered in the concerned Police Station and it reached the Illaqa Magistrate (Chief Judicial Magistrate) on 1-4-2002 at about 10.15 a.m.

3. During the course of investigation, the prosecutrix was examined by Dr. Nurjan Angmoo, ASM Hospital, Leh who found the following injuries on her person : -
"1. Bruise seen on left Iliac fossa posteriorly.
2. Small abrasion on both knees"

4. On gynaecological examination of the prosecutrix, the lady doctor found no external or internal injuries in her vagina. She also noticed copper - T thread in it. Vagina swab was also taken and sent to the laboratory for detecting the sperms, but as per the laboratory report, no spermatozoa was noticed. Since there was no clinical evidence with regard to any sexual intercourse or even penetration, therefore, the opinion given by the doctor was that there was no evidence of sexual intercourse. Her report was exhibited as ExPW - 15. She made it clear that it was less likely that the lady had sexual intercourse prior to the examination. In a specific query put to her by the Police during the investigation the lady doctor made it more clear that even if the vagina is washed, still intercourse can be detected. Accused was also got medically examined and found to be fit to perform sexual intercourse.

5. The prosecution has examined as many as 16 witnesses, but I do not feel the necessity of discussing the evidence of all of them.

6. Tundip Dorjay, the husband complainant has deposed that on 29-3-2002 while he was posted at Khalsi, his brother came to him and told that his wife was raped by the accused. He immediately came home after taking the leave and on reaching there, his wife (the prosecutrix) told him that she had come down from the first floor of her house to fetch water when the accused caught hold of her and took her to cattle shed where she was beaten by him and also forcibly raped her. She had also sustained injuries on her knee and ankle. He further deposed that then he had sent his brother to bring Lamberdar who came on the spot and thereafter a 'baradari' was called in which the accused was also summoned, but he did not accept his fault. He then took his wife to the hospital where she was immediately examined. The police was called by the hospital authorities and he lodged a written complaint (Ex.P.W. 1) with the Police. He also talks of seizure of the wearing apparels of his wife vide Ex P.W. 2 bearing his signatures.

7. P.W. Sewang Dolma stays in the neighbourhood of