This is an appeal by the State against the order of acquittal passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge and special Judge at Shimoga in Special (A) Case No.6/10 dated 30.7.2011. By the impugned judgment, the trial Judge has acquitted accused No.1 of the offences punishable under section 376 and 323 of Indian Penal Code and section 3(i)(x) and 3(i)(xii) of SC/ST (PA) Act 1989 and accused Nos.2 and 3 are acquitted of the offences punishable under section 323 r/w. section 34 Indian Penal Code and under section 3(1)(x) of SC/St (PA) Act 1989.

2. The facts leading to the appeal are as follows:

PW.1 Smt.Chowdamma, the mother of the victim (PW.2) lodged a complaint before the PSI of Bhadravathi Rural Police Station on 24.10.2009 at 3.30 p.m., alleging that on 23.10.2009 at 10.30 a.m., when her younger daughter PW.2 was spreading the washed clothes for drying, accused No.1 called her and when PW.2 proceeded to inquire him about the matter, he forcibly dragged her to a house situated in the garden land and committed forcible intercourse on her. PW.1 informed the incident to her brother (PW.3) and her son (PW.4) who were in Bengaluru and they asked her to wait till their arrival. On 24.10.2009, her elder brother Chowdaiah (PW.3) and her son Hanumantharaju (PW.4) approached accused No.1 and questioned him about the incident and at that time, accused No.1 and his men assaulted and injured them and hence, PW.1 sought for appropriate action against the culprits.

3. Based on this complaint, PW.16 the PSI of Bhadravathi Rural Police Station registered a case against accused No.1 and others and forwarded the FIR to the court. The further investigation was continued by PW.18 - the Dy.S.P., Bhadravathi who proceeded to the spot of occurrence, conducted the spot mahazar and sent the injured Hanumantharaju - PW.4 and the victim - PW.2 for medical examination. On the same day, he arrested accused No.1 and he was also sent for medical examination to the Government hospital, Bhadravathi. In the course of the investigation, he recorded the statement of the material witnesses, sent the seized clothes of the victim and accused No.1 for chemical examination and on receipt of the medial opinion and the FSL report, laid a charge sheet against all the respondents herein arraigning them as accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 respectively.

4. On committal of the case, the learned Sessions Judge framed charges against the accused for the aforesaid offences and in proof thereof, prosecution examined 18 witnesses as PW.1 to PW.18 and produced in evidence 17 documents which came to be marked as exhibits P1 to P17 and the material objects at M.Os.1 and 2. In the course of the cross-examination of prosecution witnesses, the defence got marked exhibits D1 to D4. On hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on consideration of the oral and documentary evidence produced by the prosecution, by the impugned order, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the accused of all the charges framed against them.

5. We have heard the learned HCGP and the learned counsel for the respondent/accused who have taken us through the material on record.

6. PW.1 is the mother of the victim girl. She has stated in her deposition that she came to know about the incident through PW.2 at about 4.00 p.m. and immedicately, she called her elder brother and her son who were working in Bengaluru at the relevant time and they asked her not to take any action until their arrival. After their arrival on 24.10.2009 at about 10.30 a.m., when her son Hanumantharaju (PW.4) and her elder brother Chowdaiah (PW.3) along with her sister's son (PW.15) went to question accused No.1, the accused Nos.1 to 3 along with others assaulted her son (PW.4) and pushed him in a pit. Thereafter, at about 1.00 p.m. or 1.30 p.m., they proceeded to Bhadravathi New Town Police Station and she lodged a written complaint as per Ex.P1.

7. PW.2 is the victim. She has deposed before the Court that on 23.10.2009 at about 10.30 a.m., s