The central legal point established in the judgment is the voluntary nature of the prosecutrix's actions and the absence of evidence suggesting coercion or fear, leading to the reversal of the accused's conviction under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

K.S. Jhaveri, J.

1. Both the above Appeals are directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 17.09.1998 passed by the learned Special Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 23, A'bad City in Atrocity Criminal Case No. 34/1997 whereby the appellant accused herein was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of three years and fine of Rs. 5,000/-, and in default of payment of fine, further rigorous imprisonment of six months. However, the accused was acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(2)(5) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

2. Criminal Appeal No. 1002/1998 is the Appeal preferred by the accused challenging his conviction and sentence as stated above and Criminal Appeal No. 1148/1998 is preferred by the State seeking enhancement of sentence qua the accused.

3. The facts of the case is as under:--

"3.1. The complainant who belongs to the Adivasi community and consisting of his wife, one son and two daughters resides with his family in the Isanpur area of Ahmedabad. The date of birth of the daughter of the complainant (the prosecutrix) is stated to 05.09.1997 and she has studied upto Standard IX. The accused herein is involved in his father's transportation business and the complainant is the tenant of the accused herein. The accused herein is a married man and lives separately from his father at Jagabhai Park and used to occasionally talk with the prosecutrix.

3.2. On 15.11.1996 the complainant and his wife were out of the city and the sister-in-law of the complainant and the prosecutrix were at home. It is stated that the accused came with a scooter, made the prosecutrix sit on the same and took her to his house at Jagabhai Park. From there the prosecutrix took a rickshaw and went to Balvatika. At around 5.45 pm, the accused brought clothes of the prosecutrix and said to her that 'let us go to Ambaji'. The prosecutrix refused to come so that accused is alleged to have threatened the prosecutrix by telling that he would reveal their love affair to everybody. On the insistence of the accused, the prosecutrix went to the State Transport Bus Stand at Geeta Mandir and from there, both sat in a luxury bus and reached Ambaji in the night at around 12 o' clock. Both stayed for one night at Gayatri Guest House. It is alleged that despite the opposition of the prosecutrix, the accused had sexual intercourse with her. Thereafter, they stayed at Medavala Dharmshala for another three days, and every night, the accused had sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix inspite of her opposition. Thereafter, both went to Mount Abu and stayed in a hotel where again the accused had sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix. Both again travelled back to Ambaji and stayed at a Dharmshala. Later on, both of them came back to Ahmedabad and it is stated that the accused told the prosecutrix that he would come with his Scooter to Kheda and told the prosecutrix to wait at the ST Bus Stand at Kheda. Therefore, the prosecutrix went to Kheda. The accused and his wife Sangita then reached the State Transport Bus Stand as they had to Village Chikotra. The accused thereafter told the prosecutrix that the police was behind him and therefore, the prosecutrix should come to Ahmedabad. The prosecutrix went to Vanswada and from there she went to her uncle's home where she stayed for a day and night. The next day she went to her aunt's home (the sister of her father) at Village Tametia where she stayed for three days and thereafter, in the evening she left for Ahmedabad. The prosecutrix reached Ahmedabad in the night and went to her uncle - Shankarbhai's home and later she informed her father. It is also stated that the accused had given