H. Billappa, J.

This appeal by the appellant-accused is directed against the judgment and order dated 30-1-2014 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chickaballapur, in S.C. No. 25 of 2010.

2. By the impugned judgment and order, the learned Sessions Judge has convicted the appellant-accused for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(f) of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo R.I. for a period of one year.

3. Aggrieved by that, the appellant/accused has filed this appeal.

4. Briefly stated the case of prosecution is as follows:

That P.W. 1-Karan Bahaddur is the father of the victim. He is the complainant. Ex. P. 1 is the complaint. In Ex. P. 1, it is stated, P.W. 1 was residing with his wife and children in the garden house of one Jagadish situated near Mastenahalli Village. He had three sons and two daughters. P.W. 3-Rathnamma is the wife of P.W. 1. The victim and one Kumari are the daughters of P.W. 1. The victim was studying in 5th Standard and Kumari was studying in 1st Standard. On 15-8-2009, P.W. 1 had gone to Kuppam to see his son Ganesh who was working there. P.W. 1 returned on 17-8-2009 in the afternoon. When he returned, his wife P.W. 3 informed him that on 15-8-2009, when she returned in the evening, the victim was weeping. When she questioned the victim, she told her that at about 4.00 p.m., on 15-8-2009, the accused took the victim to his house and had forcible sexual intercourse with her. P.W. 3 noticed injury on the private part of the victim. When P.W. 1 enquired his daughter, she told that on 15-8-2009, at about 4.00 p.m., the accused took the victim and her sister to his house and had sexual intercourse with the victim. P.W. 1 has requested to take action against the accused. Based on Ex. P. 1, a case in Crime No. 252 of 2009 of Chintamani Rural Police Station has been registered against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC.

5. After investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC.

6. At the trial, the prosecution has examined in all twelve witnesses i.e. P.W. 1 to P.W. 12 and Exs. P. 1 to P. 8 have been marked. On behalf of the accused, no evidence has been adduced.

7. The Trial Court on appreciation of the evidence on record has held the that appellant is guilty of the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(f) of IPC and has sentenced him to undergo R.I. for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo R.I. for a period of one year.

8. Aggrieved by that, the appellant-accused has filed this appeal.

9. The learned Counsel for the appellant contended the that impugned judgment and order cannot be sustained in law. He also submitted the that Trial Court has failed to consider the evidence on record in proper perspective. Further he submitted the that lodging of complaint itself is doubtful. P.W. 12 has deposed that P.W. 1 lodged written complaint as per Ex. P. 1 and he registered a case based on Ex. P. 1 in Crime No. 252 of 2009. P.W. 1 has deposed the that complaint was written by the police and he signed it. He does not know where the complaint was typed. Further, he does not know the contents of the complaint. The investigation has proceeded on the basis of a false complaint and a false charge-sheet has been filed. Further he submitted the that evidence of P.Ws. 1 to 3 who are material witnesses is totally inconsistent, contradictory and suffers from serious infirmities. Therefore, the Trial Court was not justified in convicting the appellant-accused based on the evidence of P.Ws. 1 to 3. Further he submitted that none of the witnesses have deposed regarding the sexual act and there is no medical evidence. A false case has been foisted against the accused due to enmity in connection with financial