ANAND BYRAREDDY, J.

1. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and the learned Government Pleader for the respondent.

2. The facts of the case are as follows:–

The present appellant was the accused. It was alleged that he and the so called victim are residents of Kunnoor village. The girl was studying in V.P. Nayak College, at Wadi. It is alleged that the appellant was constantly following her and seeking to befriend her. On 31.03.2008 at about 9.00 AM it is alleged that the appellant had managed to entice the girl to accompany him on the pretext of the appellant being in love with her and wanting to marry her and that her father was also agreeable to this and that he was in fact waiting at the bus stand in a bus and he had asked her to follow him. It is this, according to the prosecution, which compelled her to follow the appellant to the bus station and she had boarded the bus along with the appellant. He had then taken her to Yadgir, Shahapur and from there to Bangalore and also to Badanwal village by bus. He had taken a house on rent from one Shivamma, wife of Narayan Swamy at the said village and the appellant as well as the girl had stayed there and lived as husband and wife. It is alleged by the prosecution that she was detained in the house and confined to the house by the appellant for a pod of 68 days and throughout the period he had forcible sexual intercourse with her and hence the charge. It is the case of the prosecution that the appellant was traced for the first time when he was produced on 13.06.2008 before the committal Court namely the Court of Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chittapur. He was represented by an Advocate. On completion of the investigation, a charge sheet was submitted and a case registered. The Sessions Court in turn has made over the case to the II Additional Sessions Judge at Gulbarga and after further proceedings, charges having been framed for offences punishable under Sections 366, 344, 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Hereinafter referred to as the IPC, for brevity). The accused had pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution went to trial and examined 21 witnesses and marked Exs.P-1 to P-9 apart from M.O.1 and M.O.2. The statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Hereinafter referred to as Cr. P.C. for brevity). On the basis of the material evidence and the rival contentions, the Court below has framed the following points for consideration:–

1. Whether the prosecution proves that on 31.03.2008 at about 9.00 a.m. within the premises of V.P. Nayak college Wadi the accused had kidnapped the victim girl with intent that she may be compelled to marry him knowing it to be likely that she will be forced to illicit intercourse and thereby committed an offence under Section 366 of Indian Penal Code?

2. Whether the prosecution proves that on the above said date time and place the accused having kidnapped the victim girl had taken her to different places such as Yadgir, Shahapur, Bangalore and Nanjungud and confined her at Badanwal for a period of more than 10 days in the house of one Shivamma wife of Narayan Swamy and thereby committed an offence u/s. Section 344 of Indian Penal Code?

3. Whether the prosecution proves that on the above said dates, time and places during the journey from place to place and in course of wrongful confinement the accused criminally intimidated the victim girl by giving a threat to take away her life and caused alarm to her and thereby committed an offence u/s. Section 506 of Indian Penal Code?

4. Whether the prosecution proves that during his stay with the victim girl in the house of Shivamma at Badanwal village the accused had forcible sexual intercourse with the victim girl without her consent and thereby committed an offence u/s. Section 376 of Indian Penal Code?

The Court below answered point nos. 1 to 4 in the affirmative and has held that the prosecution had pro