in front of her house, the appellant, who is the neighbour of the victim girl took the victim girl to his house and sexually harassed her. The victim girl shouted, but her voice was not heard because of the sound of looms running outside and that P.W.1 pushed the accused and came out of the accused house, at that time, no one else in the accused house. Thereafter, P.W.1 went to her house, but, due to fear she did not reveal the said incident to her parents. The next day i.e. on 27.01.2014, the victim girl came back from school and went to play, on that day also the appellant called her, but, she refused to go, the appellant told her that if she tells about the said incident, which took place on 26.01.2014, he would kill her, so that the victim girl did not reveal the incident to anybody. The next day i.e on 28.01.2014, the appellant called the victim girl, but, she refused to go with him; the appellant followed her, when her mother/P.W.2 saw the same and questioned her; the victim girl revealed the truth. On the next day itself i.e. on 29.01.2014, the mother of the victim girl lodged the complaint against the appellant. While cross examining the victim girl as P.W.1 before the Court, she has clearly narrated the said incident. During the investigation, the victim girl was neither produced before any Doctor for medical examination nor produced before any Judicial Magistrate for recording statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. However, from the evidence of the victim girl, the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts.
