B.A. Patil, J.

This appeal is preferred by the accused assailing the judgment of conviction dated 20.10.2016 passed by II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Raichur in SC No. 68/2015 where under accused was convicted for the offences punishable under Section 448, 376 and 506 of IPC.

2. The case of the prosecution in brief as per the complaint are that on 5.12.2014 at about 1:00 PM when the victim was bringing the headload of firewood and keeping the same by the side of tin cattle shed in Sy.No.333/Ee at Wadwatti village went inside for drinking water, at that time accused appellant came from behind by trespassing into the said cattle shed, hugged the victim who is aged about 19 years, when she resisted, he threatened with life, thereafter by removing her clothes sexually assaulted her without her consent. It is the further case of the prosecution that on hearing the hue and cry, the mother and younger sister of the victim who were on the way to field came there, by seeing them the accused ran away from the place, thereafter they all came and informed the said fact to her father who in turn took her to the village elders, thereafter to the house of the accused, there informed about alleged act of the accused. The parents of the accused compromised with the condition that they would perform the marriage of the accused with the victim. It is further alleged that thereafter accused used to have sexual act with the victim by telling that he is going to marry her, thereafter when he came to know that she became pregnant, he refused to marry her, as such the complaint came to be filed. Thereafter, police investigated the crime and filed the charge sheet against the accused.

3. After filing the charge sheet the committal court on following the procedure laid down under Section 207 of Cr.P.C committed the case to the Sessions Court. The Sessions Court after taking the cognizance secured the accused, after hearing charge came to be framed. Since, accused denied the charges and claimed to be tried, as such the trial was fixed.

4. In order to prove the case, the prosecution in all examined P.Ws. 1 to 14 and got marked Ex.P-1 to 14 and after closure of the prosecution case, the statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. by putting the incriminating materials as against him, which he denied and he has not led any evidence on his behalf.

5. Thereafter on hearing the arguments of both the counsel, the impugned judgment came to be passed, where under accused was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 376 and 506 of IPC. Assailing the said judgment and order, the accused is before this Court.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned High Court Govt. Pleader on behalf of the State.

7. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the impugned judgment is contrary to law and facts on record. He would contend that the Court below has not properly appreciated the evidence on record and has come to a wrong conclusion. He would also contend that the trial Court has erred in not considering contradictions, omissions and non-examination of material witnesses. He would also contend that there were no ingredients to attract the provisions of Section 376 of IPC. The trial Court has wrongly convicted the accused. He would also contend that appellant and victim were known to each other, on multiple occasions, they had consensual sex. He would also contend that the alleged act of the victim was with free will and consent, as such the question of sexual assault against her does not arise. He would also contend that the entire evidence is without there being any corroboration. In order to substantiate his argument, he has relied upon several decisions namely, Basvaraj v. State of Karnataka reported in 2015 Cr.R.275 (Kant.); Deepak Gulati v. State of Haryana; Uday v. State of Karnataka; and Honayya v. State of Karnataka reported in ILR 2000 KAR 3336. By relying upon the aforesaid