JT2013(10)SC121, 2013(3)RCR(Criminal)941, 2013(9)SCALE591, 2013(3)ACR2855, AIR2013SC3005, 2014 (1) ALD(Crl.) 414 , 2013ALLMR(Cri)3303, 2013(3)BomCR(Cri)711, 2013CriLJ3964, 2013(3)JLJ123

When we Criminal Appeal No.2260 of 2009 7 of 9Page 8 consider the submission of the learned counsel about the abnormal delay in proceeding against the appellant up to the alleged date of occurrence, the trial Court has also held that the witnesses were all of rural background and illiterate persons and, therefore, some allowance will have to be given for their laxity in bringing the factum of the rape alleged to have been committed by the appellant on the deceased Radha Bai. When we consider the evidence of PW-5, who was a child witness, who was stated to be between 13 to 14 years at the time of occurrence, we find that his evidence was found to be natural and he withstood the lengthy cross-examination, which did not bring out any contradiction in his version apart from the fact that he had no axe to grind against the appellant. Further when based on the evidence of PW 5 and the medical reports, the incriminating circumstances that existed against the appellant were put in 313 questioning, he had no explanation to offer. The medical evidence also fully supported the crime alleged against the appellant. Moreover, the evidence of PW-7, also corroborated the version of PW-5 to considerable extent regarding the Criminal Appeal No.2260 of 2009 8 of 9Page 9involvement of the appellant in the commission of the crime on the deceased Radha Bai. Therefore, the ultimate conclusion of guilt found proved against the appellant as held by the trial Court as well as the High Court cannot be faulted. Having regard to our above conclusion, we do not find any merit in the appeal. The appeal fails and the same is dismissed. The appellant is on bail. The bail bond stands cancelled and he shall be taken into custody forthwith to serve out the remaining part of sentence, if any.

Indian Penal Code, 1860