1 CGHC010072452025 2026:CGHC:31137-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 388 of 2025 Shubham Damod @ Raj S/o Late Shri Subhash Damod Aged About 19 Years R/o Behind Subba Hotel, Tarbahar, Police Station Tarbahar, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. --- Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Torwa, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Kabeer Kalwani, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, Govt. Advocate and Ms. Anusha Naik, Deputy Govt. Advocate CRA No. 859 of 2025 1 - Azad Kumar Yadav S/o Rajkumar Yadav Aged About 23 Years R/o- Near Guru Ghasidas Temple, Tarbahar P.S.- Tarbahar, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 2 - Faizan Shekh @ Faizu S/o Shekh Ramjaan Aged About 23 Years R/o Near Guru Ghasidas Temple, Tarbahar P.S.- Tarbahar, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ---Appellants Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer P.S.- Torwa, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) -- Respondent (Cause title taken from Case Information System) VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2026.07.27 17:34:09 +0530 2 For Appellants : Mr. Sandeep Yadav, Advocate and Mr. Sourabh Sonwani, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, Govt. Advocate and Ms. Anusha Naik, Deputy Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri R avi ndra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 22/07/2026 1. Learned counsel for the State would submit that the notice issued to the father of the victim (PW-4) has been served to him, however, no one appears on his behalf to make submission in applications for suspension of sentence and grant of bail as well as the appeals. Though the matter was listed for consideration on I.A. No. 01/2025 (in both CRA Nos. 388/2025 and 859/2025), which are the applications for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the respective appellants, however, considering the fact that, appellants- Shubham Damod and Azad Kumar Singh are in jail since 15.11.2021 and appellant- Faizan Shekh @ Faizu is in jail since 07.02.2022, with the consent of the parties both the appeals are being finally heard. Accordingly, I.A. No. 01/2025 in both these appeals are disposed of. 2. Both these appeals are arising out of the same incident and same sessions trial and therefore, they are being heard and decided together. 3. The CRA No. 388 of 2025 has been filed by the appellants- Subham Damod @ Raj and CRA No. 859 of 2025 has been filed by the appellants- Azad Kumar Yadav and Faizan Shekh @ Faizu under 3 Section 415(2) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 against the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence dated 23.01.2025, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Second Fast Track Special Court (POCSO Act), Bilaspur, in Special Criminal Case (POCSO Act) No. 6 of 2022, arising out of Crime No. 459 of 2021, registered at police station Torwa, District Bilaspur, whereby the accused persons have been convicted and sentenced in the following manner:- For appellant- Shubham Damod @ Raj in CRA No. 388 of 2025 CONVICTION SENTENCE U/s 5(g) & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short ‘POCSO Act’). Imprisonment for Life till natural death and Fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in case of non-payment of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment for 4 months. U/s 506 of Indian Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’) Rigorous Imprisonment for 2 years and Fine of Rs. 500/-, in case of non-payment of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment for 2 months. Both the sentences are directed to run concurrently. For appellant- Azad Kumar Yadav in CRA No. 859 of 2025 CONVICTION SENTENCE U/s 5(g)/6 of POCSO ACT Life imprisonment, meaning thereby imprisonment for rest of life of the said person & fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default of payment of fine amount, additional R.I. for 04 months. U/s 506/34 of IPC R.I. for 02 years & fine of Rs. 500/-, in default in payment of fine amount, additional R.I. for 02 months. Both the sentences are directed to run concurrently. 4 For appellant- Faizan Shekh @ Faizu in CRA No. 859 of 2025 CONVICTION SENTENCE U/s 363 of IPC R.I. for 03 years & fine of Rs. 500/-, in default in payment of fine amount, additional R.I. for 02 months. U/s 366 A of IPC R.I. for 05 years & fine of Rs. 500/-, in default in payment of fine amount, additional R.I. for 02 months. U/s 5(g)/6 of POCSO Act Life imprisonment, meaning thereby imprisonment for rest of life of the said person & fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default of payment of fine amount, additional R.I. for 04 months. U/s 506 r/w 34 of IPC R.I. for 02 years & fine of Rs. 500/-, in default in payment of fine amount, additional R.I. for 02 months. All the sentences are directed to run concurrently. 4. The case of the prosecution in brief is that, on 12.11.2021, the father of the victim (PW-4) lodged a report to the police that, his minor daughter had gone to photo studio at about 12:30 PM, but could not return and her whereabouts could not be traced out. The FIR (exhibit P-7) for the offence under Section 363 of IPC was registered against unknown persons. During the investigation, the victim informed her mother through mobile phone from the house of her friend and thereafter her parents took her back and produced her before the police on 13.11.2021, then a recovery panchnama (exhibit P-1) was prepared. The victim was sent for her medical examination to District Hospital, Bilaspur, where she was medically examined by Dr. Bhavya Maheshwari (PW-6), who gave her MLC report (exhibit P-11). While 5 medically examining the victim, the doctor found bleeding from vagina, hymen tear present, complaining pain while examination and slight swelling present, however she opined that no definite opinion can be given about rape. She also observed in MLC report about history of pain in lower abdomen and burning sensation in vaginal area. Two slides of vaginal smear was preserved, sealed and handed over to the police for its chemical examination. The victim was also referred to Radiologist for age confirmation. 5. Her 164 CRPC statement (exhibit P-2) was recorded. The birth certificate of the victim (article-A) has been seized by the police vide seizure memo (exhibit P-4). The vaginal slides and underwear have also been seized by the police vide seizure memo (exhibit P-5). Spot map (exhibit P-8) was prepared by the police. The accused- Azad Kumar Yadav and Shubham Damod were arrested on 15.11.2021 and they too have been sent to District Hospital, Bilaspur for their medical examination, where they have been examined by Dr. C.B. Mishra (PW-10), who gave his report (exhibit P-14 and P-15, respectively) and found these two appellants capable to perform sexual intercourse. The accused Faizan Shekh was also arrested on 07.02.2022 and he was also sent for his medical examination to the District Hospital, Bilaspur, where he was also medically examined by the doctor, who found him also to be capable to perform sexual intercourse. His underwear has also been seized vide seizure memo (exhibit P-27). The vaginal slides of the victim, her underwear and the underwear of the accused persons were sent for its chemical examination to the Regional FSL Bilaspur, from where report (exhibit 6 P-23 and P-29) was received, in which semen and sperms were found on all the articles. Statements of the witnesses under Section 161 of CRPC have been recorded and after completion of usual investigation charge sheet was filed before the learned trial Court against the accused persons for the offence under Sections 363, 376-DA, 34 and 506 of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short ‘POCSO Act’). 6. The learned trial Court framed charge against the accused persons for the offence under Sections 363/34, 366-A/34, 376-DA and 506/34 of the IPC and Sections 5(g)/6 of the POCSO Act. the accused persons denied the charge and claimed trial. 7. In order to prove the charge against the accused persons, the prosecution has examined as many as 11 witnesses. The statements of the accused persons under Section 313 of CRPC have also been recorded, in which they denied the circumstances that appears against them, pleaded innocence and the appellant Azad Yadav submitted that he has been falsely implicated in the offence, he did not know the victim as well as Shekh @ Faizu and Shubham Damod. He has been arrested by the police in a suspicion in a false case and the victim and his family members falsely implicated him to receive compensation from the government. The appellant Shubham Damod has stated that on the date of incident, he was in his house throughout the day. The victim or other accused persons neither came to his house nor he knows the victim and other accused persons Azad and Faizu. The victim is girlfriend of Faizu. The accused Shekh Faizan has stated that on the date of incident he had 7 gone to Khuntaghat Dam along with her girlfriend and her girlfriend gave the photographs, which were taken at Khuntaghat Dam to the police. He did not know the other accused Azad and Shubham Damod and the victim also. 8. The appellants examined three defence witnesses (DW-1, DW-2 and DW-3) in support of their defence. 9. After appreciation of oral as well as documentary evidence led by the parties, the learned trial Court has convicted and sentenced the accused persons as has been mentioned in the earlier part of this judgment. Hence these appeals. 10. Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Senior Advocate appearing for the appellant- Shubham Damod @ Raj (CRA No. 388 of 2025) would submit that, the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. There are material omissions and contradictions in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and their statements are inconsistent. The evidence of the victim (PW-1) suffers from material discrepancies, which cannot be relied upon for holding conviction of the appellant. The victim in her 161 CRPC statement stated that, the three unknown persons having covered their faces came in a car, took her to unknown place and made physical relation with her, however another statement was recorded on 15.11.2021, in which she completely changed her version and then she stated that the co- accused Faizan Shekh had taken her to the house of co-accused Shubham @ Raj, where the co-accused Azad was also present and then they committed rape upon her and threatened with dire 8 consequences. These contradictory statements of the victim makes the entire prosecution case doubtful. He would further submit that although semen and sperms were found in the vaginal slides and underwear of the victim, but there is no DNA report to identify the source of semen and sperms from the accused persons. In absence of any scientific evidence, like DNA report, the presence of semen and sperms does not have much significance in FSL report. He would further submit that the medical evidence produced by the prosecution is also shaky. The doctor who medically examined the victim, has admitted in her evidence that the hymen of the victim was not completely torn. The victim was allegedly subjected to gang rape by the accused persons and the medical evidence does not corroborate her allegation and thus the evidence of the victim cannot be relied upon. In support of his submission, he would rely upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘Nirmal Prem Kumar and another v. State represented by Inspector of Police’ 2024 (20) SCC 293. 11. Mr. Sandeep Yadav, learned counsel appearing for the appellants- Azad Kumar Yadav and Faizan Shekh @ Faizu while adopting the submissions made by learned Senior Advocate would further submit that, the friend of the victim, who saw her with the accused persons, has not been examined to prove that the victim had gone with the accused persons. The victim has not been recovered from the possession of the appellants and there is no sign or protest or struggle has been noticed by the doctor during her medical examination. The age of the victim has also not been proved by the 9 prosecution that she was less than 18 years of age. There are material inconsistencies in the evidence of mother and her parents and are not sufficient to convict the appellants for the alleged offence. Learned trial Court has also not properly appreciated the evidence of defence witnesses and has erroneously convicted and sentenced the appellants. Therefore, these appellants are also entitled for benefit of doubt and they may also be acquitted. 12. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the respective appellants and have submitted that there is sufficient evidence available in the case against the appellants that they kidnapped the victim and committed gang rape upon her. The evidence of the victim does not suffer from any material omissions or contradictions. She clearly deposed the manner in which she was subjected to gang rape by the accused persons. Injuries have been found on the private part of the victim and in the FSL report, the presence of semen and sperms on her vaginal slides and underwear were also found. But for minor omissions or contradictions the evidence of prosecution witnesses are reliable and acceptable. The age of the victim has also been proved by her birth certificate (article-A), which is the statutory document of her date of birth. Even the defence could not be specifically challenged the age of the victim. In absence of any external injury on the body of the victim does not absolve the accused persons from the offence. In the cases of rape, absence of injuries are not the determining factor of the involvement of the accused persons, but it depends upon the facts of the case. He 10 would further submit that the learned trial Court has also properly appreciated the evidence of defence witnesses and has passed the well reasoned judgment convicting the appellants and sentence them. The appeals filed by the appellants do not have any merit and the same are liable to be dismissed. 13. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 14. So far as the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellants that the prosecution could not establish the age of the victim that she was minor on the date of incident, the prosecution relied upon the birth certificate (article-A) of the victim. The birth certificate (article-A) is issued by the Deputy Registrar (Birth and Deaths), which is an statutory document and admissible under Section 35 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. As per the birth certificate of the victim (article-A), her date of birth is 05.05.2008. 15. The learned counsel for the appellants further contended that the prosecution failed to establish the age of the victim as no school record reflecting her date of birth, as contemplated under Section 94(2)(i) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, was produced. We are unable to accept the said submission. The birth certificate (Article-A), recording the victim's date of birth as 05.05.2008, was registered on 17.05.2008, i.e., within twenty-one days of her birth, and being a public document, is admissible in evidence. The prosecution witnesses, namely the victim (PW-1), her mother (PW-2), father (PW-4), grandfather (PW-9) and uncle (PW-5), 11 consistently deposed that the victim was about 13–14 years of age at the time of the incident, and their testimony on this aspect remained unchallenged in cross-examination. The oral evidence thus stands fully corroborated by the documentary evidence in the form of the birth certificate. Accordingly, we are satisfied that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the victim's date of birth is 05.05.2008 and that she was below sixteen years of age on the date of the incident, i.e., 12.11.2021. 16. With respect to involvement of the accused persons, we again examined the evidence of prosecution witnesses. 17. PW-1 is the victim, who stated in her evidence that she identified the accused persons and she suffered the incident on 12.11.2021. Before the incident, on 22nd of June, 2021 she had a chatting with accused Faizu in instagram. In the month of July, he came to her and asked to accompany him. Since Faizu was her friend, she accompanied him. He took her to a lodge and made forceful physical relation with her and threatened her that if she disclose the incident to anyone, he would kill her. Thereafter, the accused Faizu used to call her and made forceful physical relation with her repeatedly. On 12.11.2021, he made a mobile call in her mother’s mobile and he called her. Initially she denied, but when he came outside of her house, she accompanied him. He took her to the house of accused Shubham @ Raj at Tarbahar, where another accused Azad was already present. All the three accused persons made forceful physical relation with her one after another. Faizu made physical relation first, then Raj @ Shubham and thereafter Azad. 12 Subsequently, she was left at Hemu Nagar, Bandhwapara by the accused Faizu and Azad. Since she was scared, she went to her friend’s house, instead her own house and then her friend informed her parents and then her parents took her back. In the next morning, her mother took her to police station because a missing report was already lodged there. She was medically examined by the doctor and her statement was recorded by the Magistrate. 18. In cross-examination, she stated that she made her instagram ID in January, 2021 in which she filled her date of birth as 05.05.2008. She was not having her own mobile phone and she was using her mother’s mobile phone. Since, she kept the mobile number of Faizu in blacklist, his number could not be displayed in mobile phone of her mother. She admitted that at the time of her medical examination, she disclosed about physical relation by two accused persons. She voluntarily stated that since she was scared, she disclosed only against two accused persons. She further stated that, when she made a statement before the police in first occasion, she was scared and when her statement was recorded on second occasion, she disclosed the entire incident. She denied that the accused Azad has not committed any bad work with her. She admitted in her further cross-examination that on first occasion she was not disclosed the name of accused Faizu. Faizu used to sent her message first on instagram and only thereafter he called her. Her friend had informed her mother that she was in her house and then her parents came there. She also denied that the accused Faizu has not committed any offence with her. She also shown her ignorance about any 13 threatening given by Faizu to her father to withdraw the case against his friends. She also admitted that in her police statement (exhibit D- 1) she disclosed that during chatting in the car, the accused persons called each other as Raja and Azad and the third person was called as Dada. She also admitted that she disclosed in her police statement that at about 11:30 PM the accused persons left her near Hemu Nagar Over-bridge and she tried to take shelter in a temple and due to fear she could not return to her house. She voluntarily stated that she was scared and she could not tell anything to anyone. She firmly denied that since she does not suffer by any incident, therefore, she could not disclosed the actual case of incident. She knew the accused Raj @ Shubham from the date of incident. She further stated that the place where she suffered the incident was the house of the accused Raj. From the evidence of this witness, it transpires that she substantially supported the prosecution’s case. Though the defence tried to brought the discrepancies about the place of incident, but she answered that since she was scared, she could not explain the exact place of incident, but she disclosed the manner in which she was kidnapped by the accused persons and subjected to gang rape by them. The discrepancies regarding place of incident and the identification of the accused persons by their names have duly been explained by the victim and the same does not affect her credibility. 19. In the matter of ‘Appa Bhai v. State of Gujarat’ 1988 Suppl. SCC 241, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in Para 13 of its judgment that:- 14 “13. ………..The Court while appreciating the evidence must not attach undue importance to minor discrepancies. The discrepancies which do not shake the basic version of the prosecution case may be discarded. The discrepancies which are due to normal errors of perception or observation should not be given importance. The errors due to lapse of memory may be given due allowance. The Court by calling into aid its vast experience of men and matters in different cases must evaluate the entire material on record by excluding the exaggerated version given by any witness. When a doubt arises in respect of certain facts alleged by such witness, the proper course is to ignore that fact only unless it goes into the root of the matter so as to demolish the entire prosecution story. The witnesses nowadays go on adding embellishments to their version perhaps for the fear of their testimony being rejected by the court. The courts, however, should not disbelieve the evidence of such witnesses altogether if they are otherwise trustworthy.” 20. The evidence of the victim can be the sole basis for conviction unless there are some reasons for the court to disbelieve her evidence. In the case of ‘State of Himanchal Pradesh v. Sanjay Kumar @ Sunny’ 2017(2) SCC 51, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in Para 30 and 31 that:- “30. By no means, it is suggested that whenever such charge of rape is made, where the victim is a child, it has to be treated as a gospel truth and the accused person has to be convicted. We have already discussed above the manner in which testimony of the prosecutrix is to be examined 15 and analysed in order to find out the truth therein and to ensure that deposition of the victim is trustworthy. At the same time, after taking all due precautions which are necessary, when it is found that the prosecution version is worth believing, the case is to be dealt with all sensitivity that is needed in such cases. In such a situation one has to take stock of the realities of life as well. Various studies show that in more than 80% cases of such abuses, perpetrators have acquaintance with the victims who are not strangers. The danger is more within than outside. Most of the time, acquaintance rapes, when the culprit is a family member, are not even reported for various reasons, not difficult to fathom. The strongest among those is the fear of attracting social stigma. Another deterring factor which many times prevent such victims or their families to lodge a complaint is that they find whole process of criminal justice system extremely intimidating coupled with absence of victim protection mechanism. Therefore, time is ripe to bring about significant reforms in the criminal justice system as well. Equally, there is also a dire need to have a survivor centric approach towards victims of sexual violence, particularly, the children, keeping in view the traumatic long lasting effects on such victims. 31. After thorough analysis of all relevant and attendant factors, we are of the opinion that none of the grounds, on which the High Court has cleared the respondent, has any merit. By now it is well settled that the testimony of a victim in cases of sexual offences is vital and unless there are compelling reasons which necessitate looking 16 for corroboration of a statement, the courts should find no difficulty to act on the testimony of the victim of a sexual assault alone to convict the accused. No doubt, her testimony has to inspire confidence. Seeking corroboration to a statement before relying upon the same as a rule, in such cases, would literally amount to adding insult to injury. The deposition of the prosecutrix has, thus, to be taken as a whole. Needless to reiterate that the victim of rape is not an accomplice and her evidence can be acted upon without corroboration. She stands at a higher pedestal than an injured witness does. If the court finds it difficult to accept her version, it may seek corroboration from some evidence which lends assurance to her version. To insist on corroboration, except in the rarest of rare cases, is to equate one who is a victim of the lust of another with an accomplice to a crime and thereby insult womanhood. It would be adding insult to injury to tell a woman that her claim of rape will not be believed unless it is corroborated in material particulars, as in the case of an accomplice to a crime. Why should the evidence of the girl or the woman who complains of rape or sexual molestation be viewed with the aid of spectacles fitted with lenses tinged with doubt, disbelief or suspicion? The plea about lack of corroboration has no substance {See Bhupinder Sharma v. State of Himachal Pradesh, (2003) 8 SCC 551}. Notwithstanding this legal position, in the instant case, we even find enough corroborative material as well, which is discussed hereinabove.” 17 21. In the case in hand, the alleged discrepancies which have been pointed out regarding place of incident and identification of the accused persons by their names are of a minor character and do not call into question the veracity of the victim’s evidence, particularly when she alleged the involvement of the accused persons in the offence of kidnapping and gang rape. 22. PW-6 Dr. Bhavya Maheshwari medically examined the victim on 13.11.2021. She stated in her evidence that the victim was brought before her and while examining her, she found bleeding present from vagina, hymen tear present, swelling and redness present on her vagina and hymen was not completely torn. She also found pain in lower abdomen and burning sensation in vaginal area. She prepared two vaginal slides and opined that no definite opinion can be given regarding rape. In cross-examination, the defence could not be able extract any material, so that her evidence could be disbelieved that no injury was found on the private part of the victim, and thus, the evidence of the victim (PW-1) about rape has been supported by the evidence of doctor (PW-6). 23. Even otherwise, it is always not necessary that the victim must suffer injury on her body. In the case of ‘Satyapal v. State of Haryana’ 2009 (6) SCC 635, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that, in the offences of rape, even the slightest form of penetration is sufficient to constitute the offence of penetrative assault and not necessary that there has to be some injury on private part or any other part of the victim’s body. It has been observed in para 18 that:- 18 “18. In Modi's Medical Jurisprudence, 23rd Edn., at pp. 897 and 928, it is stated: "To constitute the offence of rape, it is not necessary that there should be complete penetration of the penis with the emission of semen and the rupture of hymen. Partial penetration of the penis within the labia majora or the vulva or pudenda, with or without the emission of semen, or even an attempt at penetration is quite sufficient for the purpose of law. It is, therefore, quite possible to commit legally, the offence of rape without producing any injury to the genitals or leaving any seminal stains.” 24. The allegations leveled by the victim against the accused persons have been further corroborated by the FSL reports (exhibit P-23 and P-29). The alleged date of incident is the intervening of 12/13.11.2021 and the victim was medically examined on 13.11.2021 and vaginal slides were prepared on that day, which was sent for its chemical examination to the Regional FSL Bilaspur. In the FSL report (exhibit P-23), semen and sperms were found present on her vaginal slides (article-A), her underwear (article-B), underwe4ar of the accused Shubham Damod @ Raj (article-C) an the underwear of the accused Azad (article-D), whereas in the FSL report (exhibit P-29), semen and sperms were found on the underwear of the accused Shekh Faizan @ Faizu, and thus, the allegation of rape has been substantially proved by the prosecution by leading cogent and clinching evidence. 19 25. PW-2 is the mother of the victim. She stated in her evidence that when the victim could not be found in her house, they lodged the missing report to the police. In the next morning, the friend of her daughter informed that the victim is in her house and then they took her back and took her to police station. The birth certificate of the victim has been seized vide seizure memo (exhibit P-4), which is article A-1. In cross-examination, she stated that the victim informed the incident to her. She denied that the victim was having quarrel with another boy in the last year. She came to know about using instagram by her daughter at the time of incident, when she disclosed it to her. She denied that she received compensation in the case, but admitted that they made application for the same. In further cross-examination, she stated that till the lodging of the missing report, they were unaware about her whereabouts and in the next morning her friend informed her about the incident. 26. PW-4 is the father of the victim. He stated in his evidence that on the date of incident, the accused Faizu called his daughter through mobile phone and threatened her. When his daughter refused to go there, the appellant Faizu came to his house and then took his daughter with him. He took her to a house at Tarbahar, where two other accused persons already present and then they threatened her daughter and committed rape upon her. When he came back from his work, his wife informed about her missing and then he lodged a missing report to the police, which is exhibit P-7. In cross- examination, when the defence confronted his 161 CRPC statement (exhibit D-2), he disclosed that he stated in his statement about the 20 incident committed by the accused persons with his daughter, but if it is not there, he could not tell the reason. He admitted that till the victim recovered he was unaware about the incident. He also shown his ignorance about the victim’s compensation. 27. PW-5 is the uncle of the victim. He too has stated about the incident on the basis of the incident disclosed by the victim to him. PW-9 is the grandfather of the victim. He too has stated that when the victim could not be found in the house, they lodged the missing report to the police. In the next morning, her friend informed them and then he along with her father took her back and had gone to police station. Though he has been cross-examined at length, but he duly supported the prosecution’s case that the victim informed him about the incident. Thus, these witnesses PW-2, P-4, PW-5 and PW-9 are supported the victim’s evidence that she informed about the incident to her parents and family members. 28. PW-10 is the doctor, who medically examined the accused Azad Kumar Yadav and Shubham Damod @ Raj and proved his MLC report (exhibit P-14 and P-15). While medically examining these accused persons, the doctor found him capable to perform sexual intercourse and nothing in his cross-examination to disbelieve his evidence. 29. PW-11 is the investigating officer, who duly and firmly supported the prosecution’s case and investigation conducted by him. He being the procedural witness, duly supported the investigation in the case. 21 30. The defence has examined three defence witnesses (DW-1, DW-2 and DW-3). DW-1 has stated in her evidence that on 12.11.2021, she was in her house throughout the day and the accused Shubham was also present in the house. In cross-examination, she admitted that at the time, when she was in washroom, she could not see the visitors to the house of the accused Shubham. She also admitted that after giving medicine to her father, his routine is not known to her. 31. DW-2 is the mother of accused Shubham Damod. She stated in her evidence that, on the date of incident the accused Shubham was in her house throughout the day to take care of his father. In cross- examination, she admitted that she is a teacher and had gone to her duty from 12:00 Noon to 5:00 PM and she could not know, who visited to her house in between that. 32. DW-3 (inadvertently mentioned as DW-2) is the girlfriend of accused Shekh Faizu she stated in her evidence that she is in relation with Shekh Faizu since three years, which was known to their family members also. On 12.11.2021, at about 10:30 AM, they had gone to visit Khuntaghat and returned from there at about 8:30 PM. On 7-8 February, the police personals called the accused Faizu and when she came to know about the fact, she disclosed before the police that, on 12.11.2021, they had gone to Khuntaghat and handed over her mobile phone to the police. In the evening, when the police returned her mobile phone, she found that the photographs have been deleted by the police. In cross-examination, she admitted that she has not made any written application that on the date of incident the accused Faizu was with her. She denied that the accused Faizu 22 was chatting with the victim through instagram. The instagram ID of Faizu was activated in her mobile phone and therefore, his conversation with the victim through instagram is not possible. 33. Though the defence tried to build up the defence against the accused Faizu that he was not present on the spot on the date of incident and had gone to Khuntaghat with DW-3, but the defence evidence are not acceptable for the reason that, they did nothing when they came to know that the accused Faizu is an accused in the alleged offence. Except of oral evidence of defence witnesses, they have not tried to produce the photographs, which might have been extracted from the retrieved data of the mobile phone of DW-3 as has been claimed by her. The defence evidence are not sufficient to dilute the evidence of the victim, which has been supported by medical evidence as well as scientific evidence of FSL report. 34. The version of the victim commands great respect and acceptability, but if there are some circumstances which cast some doubt in the mind of the court on the veracity of the victim's evidence, then it will not be safe to rely on the said version of the victim. There is contradiction and omissions in the statement of the victim and her parents. The law is well settled that in case of rape, conviction can be maintained even on the basis of sole testimony of the victim. However, there is an important caveat which is that the testimony of the victim must inspire confidence. Even though the testimony of the victim is not required to be corroborated, if her statement is not believable, then the accused cannot be convicted. The prosecution has to bring home the charges leveled against the appellant beyond 23 any reasonable doubt, which the prosecution has failed to do in the instant case. 35. In the case of Dola @ Dolagobinda Pradhan and another v. State of Odisha’ 2018 (18) SCC 695, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that:- “9. However, as is also evident from the observations above, such reliance may be placed only if the testimony of the prosecutrix appears to be worthy of credence. In this regard, it is also relevant to note the following observations of this Court in Raju v. State of M.P. 4, which read thus: (SCC p. 141, paras 10-11) "10. The aforesaid judgments lay down the basic principle that ordinarily the evidence of a prosecutrix should not be suspected and should be believed, more so as her statement has to be evaluated on a par with that of an injured witness and if the evidence is reliable, no corroboration is necessary. Undoubtedly, the aforesaid observations must carry the greatest weight and we respectfully agree with them, but at the same time they cannot be universally and mechanically applied to the facts of every case of sexual assault which comes before the court. 11. It cannot be lost sight of that rape causes the greatest distress and humiliation to the victim but at the same time a false allegation of rape can cause equal distress, humiliation and damage to the accused as 24 well. The accused must also be protected against the possibility of false implication, particularly where a large number of accused are involved. It must, further, be borne in mind that the broad principle is that an injured witness was present at the time when the incident happened and that ordinarily such a witness would not tell a lie as to the actual assailants, but there is no presumption or any basis for assuming that the statement of such a witness is always correct or without any embellishment or exaggeration." Having due regard in our mind to the abovementioned settled position in law, we have assessed the entire material on record meticulously.” 36. Upon a comprehensive reappreciation of the entire oral and documentary evidence on record, we find that the prosecution has succeeded in establishing the guilt of the appellants beyond reasonable doubt. The testimony of the victim (PW-1) is cogent, natural, trustworthy and inspires confidence. The alleged discrepancies regarding the place of occurrence, the manner of identification of the accused persons and the sequence in which the incident was disclosed are minor in nature and do not strike at the root of the prosecution case. Rather, such omissions and improvements stand satisfactorily explained by the victim in view of the trauma and fear she was subjected to immediately after the incident. Her evidence receives substantial corroboration from the medical evidence of PW-6, which reveals injuries on her private parts 25 consistent with recent sexual assault, and from the FSL reports (Exhibits P-23 and P-29), wherein semen and sperms were detected on the vaginal slides and underwear of the victim as well as on the underwear of all the accused persons. The age of the victim also stands duly proved by her birth certificate (Article-A), a statutory document admissible under Section 35 of the Indian Evidence Act, establishing that she was a child within the meaning of the POCSO Act on the date of the incident. The evidence of the parents and other family members is consistent with the immediate disclosure made by the victim and lends further assurance to her version. The defence evidence, on the other hand, neither probabilises the plea of false implication nor creates any reasonable doubt regarding the prosecution case. The plea of alibi raised on behalf of accused Faizan Shekh remains wholly unsubstantiated in the absence of any reliable documentary or electronic evidence, while the evidence adduced by the remaining defence witnesses is insufficient to discredit the consistent and reliable prosecution evidence. It is well settled that conviction in a case of sexual assault can be founded solely on the testimony of the victim, if it is found to be reliable and trustworthy, and corroboration is only a matter of prudence and not of law. In the present case, apart from the unimpeachable testimony of the victim, there exists ample medical, scientific and circumstantial evidence corroborating the prosecution version. 37. We, therefore, find no infirmity, perversity or illegality in the appreciation of evidence by the learned trial Court. The findings of conviction recorded against the appellants are based on proper 26 appreciation of the evidence on record and do not warrant interference by this Court. Consequently, the appeals being devoid of merit deserve to be and hereby dismissed. 38. The appellants- Shubham Damod and Azad Kumar Singh are in jail since 15.11.2021 and appellant- Faizan Shekh @ Faizu is in jail since 07.02.2022. They shall serve the entire sentence as awarded by the learned trial Court. 39. Registry is directed to send a copy of this judgment to the concerned Superintendent of Jail where the appellants are undergoing their jail sentence to serve the same on the appellants informing them that they are at liberty to assail the present judgment passed by this Court by preferring an appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court with the assistance of High Court Legal Services Committee or the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee. 40. Let a copy of this judgment and the original records be transmitted to the trial Court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice ved