1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This appeal has been preferred for setting aside of the judgment of conviction dated 23.08.2018 (hereinafter referred to as the 'impugned judgment') and order of sentence dated 24.08.2018 ( hereinafter referred to as the 'impugned order') passed by learned Additional Judge - I - cum - Special Judge, Sexual Offences Act, (POCSO), Munger (hereinafter referred to as the 'learned trial court') in Dharhara P.S. Case No. 42 of 2017, G.R. No. 707 of 2017, POCSO Case No. 09 of 2017 whereby and whereunder the appellant has been convicted for the offence under S.376 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC') and S.3 / 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (in short 'POCSO Act') and he has been ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.25,000/- under S.376, IPC and rigorous imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.25,000/- under S.4 of the POCSO Act. In default of payment of fine, he has to undergo further imprisonment for six months. Both the sentences are to run concurrently.

3. Prosecution Case
The present case is based on the written application submitted by the informant (PW - 1) to the Hemjapur O.P., P.S. - Dharhara. In her written application, PW - 1 has stated that on 28.03.2017 in between 6-7:00 PM, this appellant who is the son of her cousin father - in - law allured the victim girl aged between 6-7 years, took her to his room on the pretext of facilitating her to watch TV, gave him a note of Rs.Ten and committed rape on her. It is alleged that when the victim girl tried to cry, this accused gagged her mouth by his hands. The informant saw her daughter weeping outside and she was in pool of blood whereafter she went inside the latrine but did not come out for a long time whereafter the informant went inside and found that plenty of blood were spread on the floor. Upon inquiry, informant's daughter told the entire story while weeping. Thereafter the informant took her to Medini Chowki for treatment.

4. On the basis of this written application, Dharhara P.S. Case No. 42 of 2017 dated 29.03.2017 was registered under S.376, IPC and S.3 / 4 of the POCSO Act. After investigation of the case, Police submitted a chargesheet bearing No. 51 of 2017 dated 30.04.2017 against the appellant under S.376, IPC and S.3 / 4 of the POCSO Act. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, finding the case under the POCSO Act, transferred the case to POCSO Court where POCSO Case No. 9 of 2017 was registered. On 09.05.2017, learned Additional District Judge 1st - cum - Special Judge, POCSO Act took cognizance of the offence under S.376, IPC and S.3 / 4 of the POCSO Act against the appellant. Thereafter, on 20.06.2017, charges were framed against the appellant under S.376, IPC and S.3 / 4, POCSO Act. The charges were read over to the appellant in Hindi. The appellant denied the charges and claimed to be tried.

5. In course of trial, prosecution examined altogether eight witnesses and exhibited several documents. The list of prosecution witnesses and the exhibits produced on behalf of the prosecution witnesses are being mentioned hereunder in tabular form: -

List of Exhibits produced on behalf of the Prosecution

Findings of the learned Trial Court

6. Learned trial court after analysing all the evidences available on the record found that the informant (PW - 1) has supported her case. Learned trial court found that the appellant is close relative of the victim and the house of the victim and the appellant are side by side, so in normal course not noticing by any witness regarding visit of victim to the house of accused is not of much importance. Learned trial court found that defence has submitted that the appellant is a juvenile and is not capable of committing crime. In relation to this, learned trial court observed that Juvenile Justice Board, Munger assessed the age of th