him that the appellant, after giving a fist blow to her, took the prosecutrix to towards the jungle and PW-14 told her that the prosecutrix was raped by him; (v) after searching, prosecutrix was recovered from the jungle after two hours and at that time, she was found in a naked condition and (vi) on his asking, the prosecutrix told him that the appellant after using pressure took her to the jungle and committed raped upon her. There is nothing in the cross-examination of PW-12 indicating any evidence of contradictions or discrepancies in the testimony of PW-13. It may be noted that from the evidence of PW-7, who was declared hostile witness by the prosecution, it has been revealed that he saw the mother of the prosecutrix going downwards in search of the prosecutrix and after sometime she saw the mother of the prosecutirx lying on the ground. On her asking, she told him that the appellant dealt a blow on her and he fled away, but he did not see the prosecutrix whereupon he was declared as hostile. However, in his cross-examination, he revealed that on recovery of the prosecutrix in the jungle, when her father asked her (the prosecutrix) in their presence, she told them that she had been raped by the appellant. Though PW-8 was also declared hostile by the prosecution, he, in his cross-examination, revealed that when the father of the prosecutrix asked the prosecutrix, she told him that she was raped by the appellant.
