1977 P Cr (PLP)

‑‑ S. 376‑Evidence, appreciation of‑Prosecutrix immediately after her rape, narrating her woeful story to her father and her story also supported by medical evidence as well as Chemical Examiner's report‑Prosecution, held, successfully established its case against accused‑Conviction and sentence maintained, in circumstances. [Rape‑Evidence]. Syed Abid Hussain Bokhari for Appellant. A. R. Shabab Mufti for the State. Ramzan son of Karim aged 17/18 years has before convicted under section 376, P. P. C. for having committed rape can Mst. Amiran P. W. I aged 12 years axed was sentenced to five years' R. I. vide judgment dated the 29th of April, 1975, of the Magistrate Section 30, Sahiwal. His appeal is being disposed of by this judgment.

2. The occurrence took place on the 26th of June, 1974, at about 11/12 noon in the fields of Chak No. 26/Rukra, at a distance of six miles from Police Station Harappa, District Sahiwal. F. I. R. (Exh. P. A.) was lodged by Mst. Amiran (P. W. 1) at 1.30 p. m on the 27th of June, 1974. and it was recorded at the Police Station by Asghar Ali, H. C. (P. W. 4).

3. According to the statement of Mst. Amiran P. W. she was plucking grass in the field when the appellant caught hold of her and committed rape on her. On her alarm were attracted to the scene of crime Manzoor (P. W. 2) and Mughla (given up as having been won over). After having committed the crime and on seeing the eyewitnesses the appellant ran way and he could not be apprehended. Mat. Amiran P. W. returned to her house and informed her father Muhammad (P. W. 3) that the appellant had committed rape on her. She was taken to the hospital by her father and was medically examined. At the trial stage Manzur (P. W. 2) was declared hostile as he had submitted that he did not see the appellant committing rape on Mst. Amiran P. W. However, he stated that both of them were neighbours. Muhammad (P. W. 3) reported the version given by Mst. Amiran P. W. He stated that Mst. Amiran P. W. told him on her re aching home after the occurrence that she had been raped by the appellant. He got her medically examined and thereafter on the following day took her to the Police Station where her statement was recorded by Asghar Ali, H, C. (P. W. 4). Asghar Ali. H. C. (P. W. 4) recorded Exh. P. A. Ch. Mohammad .all, S.I. (P. W. 6) took into possession her blood‑stained shalwar P. I vide memo. Exh. P. B. The appellant was arrested by the. Mohammed Ali S. I. (P. W. 6) on the 27th of June, 1974 He was medically examined and according to the report of the Medical Officer Exh. P. E. he was declared fit to perform sexual intercourse. This Medical Officer was not produced at the trial. Only his report has been exhibited as Exh. P. E. The appellant in his statement before the trial Court denied having participated in the occurrence and stated that he had been implicated falsely due to enmity. He led no evidence in defence. Lady Dr. Mrs. Qamar Salim (P. W. 5) medically examined gist. Amiran P. W. on the 27th of June, 1974 at 11 a. m. She did not find any injury on the person of Mst. Amiran P. W. but found that sae had been subjected to rape. Two of her vaginal swabs were sent for chemical examina tion and the result was that they were found to be stained with semen.

4. I have heard learned counsel and carefully examined the record. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that in the present case the prosecution has produced no eyewitness of the occurrence except Mst. Amiran P. W. herself and that she in her cross‑examination when asked the question as to whether she could identify the appellant as the person who had committed rape on her and who was present in the Court, she had stated that she could not identify him as such. On the basis of this statement of hers learned counsel attempted to argue that since at the trial stage she could not identify the appellant the appellant should have been given the benefit of doubt. It was further submitted that it was in evidence that the appellant and Mst. Amiran P. W. were neighbours and that therefore, there was no reason why she could not identify him if he bad been the culprit. I have carefully considered this argument of learned counsel but find it without any force. It is clear form her statement that while she was plucking grass the appellant, caught hold of her and committed rape on her. According to her father she is aged about 12 years. Learned counsel had pointed out to me that her age mentioned is 14/15 years by the trial Court when her statement was recorded. But that is irrelevant because according to the medical evidence her uterus was not fully developed which indicated that she should have not been more than 12 years old. She did not have any injury on her person because she was too young to resist or was afraid. Any way, the fact cannot be denied that she was subject to rape by the appellant because when after the occurrence she arrived her house she immediately informed her father. Her statement is supported by Muhammad (P. W. 3) her father who took her to the Police Station and got the F. I. R. recorded. He also took her for medical examination. The statement of Lady Dr. Mrs. Qamar Salim P. W. supports the testimony of Mst. Amiran as well as Muhammad P. W. The statement of Mst. Amiran P. W. is further supported by the report of the Chemical Examiner as well as the report of the Medical Officer who examined the appellant. No doubt the appellant was neighbour of Mst. Amiran P. W. but it is understandable that at the trial stage when she was asked to identify the appellant who had raped her she declined to do so out of shyness and humiliation. I have carefully gone through the record and in my view the prosecution has successfully established its case as against the appellant. The result is that his conviction as well as sentence were quite proper and they are accordingly maintained. This appeal is dismissed. Appeal dismissed.