This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the Court below in Spl. POCSO (S.C.) No. 35/2015 dated 14.02.2017/15.02.2017 wherein the accused is convicted for the offences punishable u/S 376 of IPC and u/S 5(1) r/w Sec. 6 of POCSO Act, 2012, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence punishable u/S 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 r/w Sec. 376 of IPC with default clause.

2. Brief factual matrix of the case are as under:

That the victim girl is a minor aged about 16 years; he induced her that he will marry her and saying so had sexual intercourse with her in a garden land belonging to Mahantesh Pattanshetty of Irakalgada; on 02.08.2015 kidnapped her, took her to Kunchur village near Ranebennur, kept her in a room near the house of one Somappa Babujan and had sexual intercourse with her. On the filing of the complaint by the complainant, case in Crime No. 196/2015 as per Ex.P.14 came to be registered by the Police against the accused for the offences punishable u/S 363, 376 of IPC besides Sec. 6 of POCSO Act, 2012. PW13 – Pramod, H.C. No. 135 of Koppal Rural Police Station received the complaint as per Ex.P.8. After investigation charge sheet has been laid by the Investigating Officer against the accused for the aforesaid offences as where the trial Court has framed the charge sheet against the accused, the accused did not plead guilty but claimed to be tried. The prosecution in order to prove the guilt against the accused examined witnesses as per PWs.1 to 16 and got marked documents as per Exs.P.1 to P.18. On appreciation of the entire materials placed by the prosecution analytically held conviction against the accused for the offence punishable u/S 376 of IPC r/w Sec. 6 of POCSO Act, 2012. It is this judgment which is challenged in this appeal.

3. I have heard arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Govt. Pleader for the State and perused the records of the case.

4. Whereas the learned counsel for the appellant who has taken me through the evidence of P.W.1, who is the Civil Judge & JMFC, Koppal, who has stated in her evidence that, on 26.08.2015 she recorded the statement of the victim u/S 164 of Cr.P.C. upon the requisition submitted by the CPI, Koppal. Victim was accompanied by a Woman Police Constable from Koppal Rural Police Station. On enquiry with the victim as to whether anybody has tutored or induced her, she stated that nothing has been made and accordingly she gave statement u/S 164 of Cr.P.C. as per Ex.P.1. The same is forwarded to the concerned Court in a sealed cover. In the cross-examination made on behalf of the accused she has denied the suggestion that the age of the victim and the facts of the case have not been voluntarily stated by the victim. She has further denied the suggestion that the Police have threatened the victim to state the facts as per Ex.P.1 as contemplated u/S 164 of Cr.P.C.

5. P.W.7 is the victim girl. She has stated that, one year back-she had accompanied her mother to the garden land of one Mahantesh in the limits of Jinnapur Tanda. Her mother used to attend coolie work there where the accused also used to come there for coolie work. She was sent to a nearby room in the land to get water. When she had been to nearby the room she found that the accused was there and he told that he would marry her and saying so he made physical contact with her. The accused had committed similar act thrice but she did not intimate this fact to her mother. On another day she had been to the garden land of Mahantesh. By that time also the accused was there to attend the coolie work. He told her that, in the evening he would come to her house and take her to Ranebennur and get her married. At about 11 p.m. when her father and mother were sleeping in the house she came out of her house and later herself and the accused went to Irakalagad by walking and from there they went to Kop