Credible prosecutrix testimony can sustain rape conviction despite defective investigation and delayed complaint.

Conviction for rape was sustained on the credible and consistent testimony of the prosecutrix, who was not to be treated as an accomplice. Defective investigation, failure to prove seizure of the accused's garment, and absence of some corroborating witnesses did not by themselves discredit her direct evidence. Medical evidence and semen stains on the clothing and vaginal swab supported her account, and the delay in lodging the complaint was explained by the victim's natural reluctance and the need to inform her husband first. The evidence as a whole inspired confidence, so the conviction was upheld and the appeal failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the conviction for rape could be sustained on the basis of the prosecutrix's testimony despite defective investigation, absence of certain corroborating witnesses, and delay in lodging the complaint.

Analysis: The evidence showed that the prosecutrix was a young labourer working in an unfamiliar environment, was left alone with the appellant after another worker was sent away, and consistently narrated the at the earliest opportunity. The defective investigation and failure to prove the seizure of the accused's garment weakened the prosecution case, but they did not by themselves discredit the direct testimony of the prosecutrix. The medical evidence and the presence of semen stains on her clothing and in the vaginal swab provided assurance to her version. The delay in reporting was explained by the natural reluctance of a woman victim to complain immediately and by the need to inform her husband first. A prosecutrix of a sexual offence is not to be treated as an accomplice, and her evidence can sustain a conviction if found trustworthy and supported by surrounding circumstances.

Conclusion: The conviction was upheld; the appeal failed.

Ratio Decidendi: In a sexual offence case, a conviction may safely rest on the credible testimony of the prosecutrix without formal corroboration, and defective investigation or some delay in complaint does not vitiate the conviction where the evidence as a whole inspires confidence.

---