(1.) This revision has been filed against the order framing charge under Section 376 of IPC. The main ground of challenge is that the statement of all the witnesses of the prosecution were not recorded as provided in the proviso to Section 202 (2) Cr.P.C. The victim lady and one more witness have been examined. There is nothing on record to indicate that there are other witnesses to the incident. In the circumstances this legal argument lacks factual foundation.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has also argued that the medical report does not indicate presence of any sperm. However, medical report is not conclusive and cannot be utilized at this stage for quashing the charge.
(3.) There is no force in the contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner. This revision is accordingly dismissed.