There is force in the plea. It would be apparent from a perusal of the statement of none else or other than the prosecutrix herself that the marriage between her and appellant Sukhvinder singh had indeed taken place. In the course of the cross-examination, she conceded that photogrpahs Ex. D2 to Ex. D10 were taken at the time of their marriage. That photographs Ex. D11 to Ex. D18 were also taken at that time and that ceremony of Anand Karaj was performed at the time of marriage, (which was also attended by her maternal uncle Surjit Singh alongwith 8- 10 persons from the village, was also stated by her. Though she conceded that five persons came over as Baratis in a jeep, she had no idea about whether any tent installed for the marriage ceremony or not and she also had no idea about whether “any meals, cold drink, tea etc. were provided to the Barati or not.” She, however, conceded that she remained with the appellant Sukhvinder Singh for about one month at Jandwala. She also conceded, as correct, a suggestion that appellant Sukhvinder Singh used to leave for the fields in the morning and would come home in the evening. It is also in her statement that after the marriage, her father fetched her from her matrimonial house to her parental house and that it was appellant Sukhvider Singh who, thereafter, brought her from her parental house to
