The central legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between consent in the context of rape and the offence of cheating under Section 417 IPC, emphasizing the requirement of inducement by deceit for a conviction under Section 417 IPC.

1. This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the judgment of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Villupuram (Lower Appellate Judge) dated 112. 2005 made in C.A.No.39/2005 confirming the conviction recorded and sentence passed by the trial court (Chief Judicial Magistrate/Assistant Sessions Judge, Villupuram) for an offence punishable under Section 417 IPC in S.C.No.64/2003.

2. The petitioner herein was prosecuted before the trial court (court of Chief Judicial Magistrate/Assistant Sessions Judge), Villupuram for alleged offences punishable under Sections 366, 417 and 376 IPC. After trial, the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Villupuram acquitted the petitioner herein/accused in respect of the third charge, namely the charge for an offence punishable under Section 376 IPC. However, the trial judge held him guilty of the other two offences (offences punishable under Section 366 IPC and 417 IPC) and sentenced him as follows:

i) for the offence under Section 366 IPC, the trial court imposed a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of 7 years and a fine of Rs.3,000/-and a default sentence of six months simple imprisonment in case of default in payment of fine;

and

ii) for the offence under Section 417, a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for one year, without any fine, was imposed.

3. As against the said judgment of conviction and sentence for the offences punishable under Section 366 IPC and 417 IPC, the Revision Petitioner (accused) preferred an appeal on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, Villupuram under Section 374(3) of Criminal Procedure Code. The learned Principal Sessions Judge (Lower Appellate Judge), after hearing, came to the conclusion that the conviction for the offence punishable under Section 366 IPC could not be sustained and accordingly reversed the judgment of the trial court for the said offence, set aside the conviction and sentence and acquitted the revision petitioner herein/accused in respect of the said offence also. However, the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Villupuram concurred with the trial court regarding the charge for the offence under Section 417 and confirmed the conviction and sentence thereof.

4. Aggrieved by and challenging the same, the revision petitioner herein/accused has preferred this Criminal Revision Case on various grounds set out in the grounds of Criminal Revision Case.

5. This court heard the submissions made by Mr.V.Ayyadurai, learned counsel for the petitioner in the Revision Case and R.Muniapparaj, learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) representing the respondent herein. The materials available on record were also perused.

6. The accused in S.C.No.64/2003 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate/Assistant Sessions Judge, Villupuram who was convicted and sentenced as aforesaid by the trial court for an offence under Section 417 IPC, which was confirmed in appeal by the lower appellate court (Principal Sessions Judge, Villupuram) is the petitioner in the criminal revision case. He was prosecuted before the Chief Judicial Magistrate/Assistant Sessions Judge, Villupuram in S.C.No.64/2003 for an offence under Section 366, an offence under Section 417 IPC and an offence punishable under Section 376 IPC

7. The prosecution theory proceeds as follows:-

The petitioner and the P.W.1 - defacto complainant (both belonging to the same village by name Poovalur) developed a love affair between them and they used to have meeting with each other very often. On 20.09.1998, at about 1.00 p.m. the petitioner took P.W.1 to a nearby forest called T.Athipakkam forest in the guise of having a discussion with her regarding their marriage. At about 5.00 p.m. against her will and without her consent, the petitioner had forcible sexual intercourse with P.W.1. When she was crying after the said incident, the petitioner consoled her promising that he would definitely marry her. Thereafter, for about three years, P.W.1 was residing in a ladies hostel at Che