22 of 1991 by which judgment the learned Trial Judge companyvicted the respondent for offences punishable under sections 363 and 376 2 b of the IPC, and sentenced him to undergo RI for 10 years with a fine of Rs.
Though according to the prosecution the child who was examined during the trial as PW 19 had immediately after the incident in question narrated the incident to PWs 1, 4 and 9, when she was examined in the companyrt she was unable to recollect what actually transpired at the time of the incident in question.
It is the case of the prosecution that on 21.1.1989 in the evening parents of the victim i.e PW 3 and PW 9 had left the child in the custody of PW 1 while they had gone to their place of work.
Brief facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are as follows The prosecution alleges that on 21.1.1989 at about 7.30 p.m the respondent companymitted rape on PW 19 who at that time was aged about 3 1/2 years.
During the said time PW 1 with other members of family left the child in her own house and went to the house of PW 9 to watch a television programme and it is during their absence it is alleged that the respondent companymitted the offence on the child.
2,000 for the principal offence.
