PALSHIKAR,J. - (1.) BEING aggrieved by the order of acquittal passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bikaner on 5.1.84 in Sessions Case No. 128/82, the State has come up in appeal against the said acquittal on the grounds mentioned in the memo of appeal as also verbally canvassed before me.
(2.) WITH the assistance of the learned P.P. and the learned counsel for the accused, I have scrutinised the record and reappreciated the oral and documentary evidence. The prosecution story as unfolded on reappreciation of the evidence is that on 3.9.82 a seven years' old girl named Soma was playing near her house on the road when the accused came there, took her into the house and raped her. At that time, the girl cried and hearing her cries, one Gordhan went to the house. On seeing him, the accused ran away. Gordhan took the bleeding girl to her mother and thereafter when the father of the girl returned, a First Information Report (FIR) was lodged at 9 AM on 5.9.82 in Police Station, Nokha. After investigation, the case was registered and the accused was charge sheeted under Sec. 363, 366 and 376 I.P.C. The learned Judge on appreciation of the evidence on record, came to the conclusion that the prosecution has filed to prove the guilt and, therefore, proceeded to acquit the accused of all the offences with which he was charged. Being dissatisfied with this order of acquittal, the State has come in appeal as aforesaid.
(3.) THE learned P.P. contended that the reasons given by the learned trial Judge in acquitting the accused are unsustainable in law. The delay caused in lodgment of the FIR is satisfactorily explained. The testimony of the prosecutrix is liable to be accepted. It is duly corroborated by the medical evidence and only for few minor contradictions, the acquittal should not have been recorded.;