ORDER :

This Criminal Revision Case under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. assails the conviction of the revision petitioner for the offence under Section 354 I.P.C. which was initially handed down by a judgment dated 31.03.2008 by learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Ramachandrapuram in Sessions Case No.333 of 2006 and thereafter confirmed in appeal by a judgment dated 16.09.2008 by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, East Godavari, Rajahmundry in Criminal Appeal No.180 of 2008. Respondent herein is the State.

2. The assault or criminal force to a woman or a girl with an intention to outrage her modesty is punishable under Section 354 I.P.C. The accusation for such an offence is very easy to make and very difficult to rebut. Therefore, it is always felt necessary by Courts to see that the conduct of the victim is consistent with ordinary probabilities and independent corroboration is normally insisted upon. The entire surrounding circumstances require appreciation.

3. Crime No.77 of 2006 was investigated into by Sub-Inspector of Police, Draksharama Police Station and that resulted in filing a police report in terms of Section 173 Cr.P.C. alleging offence under Section 376 read with 511 I.P.C. Learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramachandrapuram complied with the procedure under Section 209 Cr.P.C. and committed that case to the learned Sessions Court, East Godavari. The accused was charged for the offence under Section 376 read with 511 I.P.C. and after due trial, he was found not guilty for that offence but was found guilty for a lesser cognate offence under Section 354 I.P.C. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Ramachandrapuram convicted and sentenced the accused directing him to undergo simple imprisonment for five years and pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- with a default sentence of simple imprisonment for one month. The remand period was directed to be set off. In the appeal before the learned Sessions Judge there was due hearing and finally learned Sessions Judge found that the judgment impugned was right on facts and law and dismissed the appeal and thereby confirmed the guilt, conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court against the accused. All the principles of fair trial have been complied with as the record discloses it. The accused was furnished with copies of documents on which the prosecution intended to rely upon and was informed of the charge against him and his plea of not guilty was recorded and all the witnesses were allowed to be cross-examined by the defence and his response to incriminating evidence was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Althroughout the accused has been defended of his own learned counsel while the State has been represented by the learned Public Prosecutors at various stages. In this revision with reference to competence of the Courts that tried the case and that heard the appeal and the manner in which the trial was conducted and the appeal was heard, there are no challenges. Therefore, it is sufficient now to find out the substance of the case for the purpose of analysis.

4. The case mentioned offence allegedly took place on 18.05.2006 in a village called Kapavaram in Ramachandrapuram Mandal, East Godavari District. The accused was aged about 25 years by then. He was married and had a child. The victim was a girl aged 14 years and studied upto VII Class and discontinued it and was remaining at her house helping her family members. She lives in a hut along with her younger brother and younger sister and the father and mother. The accused and this family are residents of the same village called Kapavaram. They are not immediate neighbours. The parents of the victim girl have been agricultural coolies. The accused for some time did agriculture and thereafter he has been an agricultural coolie. The alleged offence took place in this village setting and the scene of offence is stated to be the very house of the victim girl. It was during broad day light at about 2:30 P.M. inside the house of