8. Let us first consider, whether the prosecution has established the identity of the accused who allegedly committed rape upon the victim girl. The alleged date of occurrence is 03.10.2002 at about 8 a.m. and the FIR was lodged on 10.10.2002. The incident as narrated by the informant in her written report discloses that one boy from village-Porha dragged her into the bushes and committed rape upon her. She has claimed that her other friends namely, Dulari Kumari and Sanju Kumari also came there and the accused after threatening them fled away. The informant has named the accused in the FIR. However, the victim has admitted that she did not know the accused or any other person of village-Porha, from before. This, the learned A.P.P. has tried to explain by asserting that after the identity of the accused was established and the panchayat was held , the victim came to know the name of the accused, and that is why, she has named the accused in the FIR. The evidence of the victim, however, when examined with her written statement dated 10.10.2002 does not disclose, how she came to know the name of the accused. Moreover, the victim has failed to explain how she came to know that the accused who sexually assaulted her belonged to village-Porha and unless, it is revealed from the prosecution evidence, the story of panchayat in which the elder brother of the respondent-accused was called cannot be believed. Story of panchayati as narrated in her written report, is conspicuously absent in her examination-in-chief. None of the persons
