IMPORTANT POINT
The prosecution must prove the victim's age and absence of consent beyond reasonable doubt; inconsistencies in testimony can lead to acquittal.

JUDGMENT :

(S. Sunil Dutt Yadav, J.)

This judgment has been divided into the following Sections to facilitate analysis:

I. BRIEF FACTS

The present appeal is filed by the sole accused seeking for setting aside of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed in Special Case No. 1/2010. The accused was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 366(A), 376, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Atrocities Act’]. The accused was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of three months for the offence under Section 447 of IPC, further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- for the offence under Section 366(A) of IPC and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment of three months. As regards the offence under Section 376 of IPC, the accused was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine, would undergo simple imprisonment of one year. The accused was further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years for offence under Section 506 of IPC. As regards the offence under Section 3(2)(v) of the Atrocities Act, sentence of life-imprisonment with fine of Rs.50,000/- and in default of payment of fine, was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. On deposit of fine amount, a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- was ordered to be paid to the victim.

2. The facts made out by the prosecution was that on 21.10.2009, at about 12:00 am at midnight/early hours of the next day, when complainant and other family members were sleeping in the farmhouse, the accused trespassed into the house, threatened the victim of doing away with her life if she opened her mouth, kidnapped her on a motor-cycle, took her to the farmhouse of C.W. 13 - Boramma W/o Siddappa Alur and confined her from 21.10.2009 till the midnight of 25.10.2009. It was alleged that during that period the accused forcibly raped her while threatening her with the knowledge that she was a minor and belonged to Scheduled Caste. Accordingly, it was alleged that the accused had committed the offences punishable under Sections 447, 366(A), 376, 443, 506 of IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the Atrocities Act.

3. Charge-sheet was filed, cognizance of the offence was taken and after hearing counsel for accused and prosecution, charges were framed. Prosecution has examined P.W.1 to P.W.16, got marked Exhibits P1 to P23 and M.O. 1 to 3 and closed M.O. 1 to 3. Exhibit D – series have also been marked as Exhibits D1 to D11. Exhibits D1 to D5 have been marked in the cross-examination of P.W.3 and Exhibits D6 to D3(b) have been marked during the cross-examination of P.W.4, Exhibits D7 and D8 have been marked in the cross-examination of P.W.7 and Exhibits D9 to D11 have been marked in the cross-examination of P.W.8. Under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, statement of accused was recorded in which as regards all incriminating material, the accused has denied and has not chosen to lead any defence evidence.

II. TRIAL COURT OBSERVATIONS

4. The trial Court has framed points for consideration and answered the same in the affirmative. The trial Court as regards the age of the victim, has noticed that the compla