JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Criminal Revision Case is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C., to set aside the judgment in C.A.No.69 of 2005 dated 03.02.2014 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Tiruvannamalai confirming the judgment as made in S.C.No.163 of 2002 dated 17.12.2005 on the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruvannamalai and call for the records and acquit the petitioner from all charges.)

1. This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioner/sole accused, aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruvannamalai dated 17.12.2005 in S.C.No.163 of 2002, thereby, convicting the petitioner for an offence punishable under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code and imposing a sentence of seven years Rigorous Imprisonment and a fine of amount of Rs.500/-, in default, to undergo one month Simple Imprisonment and the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Tiruvannamalai dated 03.12.2014 in C.A.No.69 of 2005, thereby, dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner and confirming the conviction and sentence imposed by the Trial Court.

2. On 02.01.2002, P.W.1, the prosecutrix went to Kalasapakkam Police Station and gave a statement that on the same date i.e., on 02.01.2002 at about 10.00 A.M, when she went to graze her milch cow near the land belonging to her family, the petitioner/accused came to her, made sweet talk and suddenly pulled her by holding her hand and dragged her to the teak farm belonging to Govind Vathiyar and laid her down and committed rape by preventing her from making any noise and forcefully indulged in the act and at that time, her brother PW2 accidentally came to that spot and upon seeing him, the petitioner/accused left her and started running away. In fact, P.W.2, picked up a stone and threw at him, but, however, the same hit her at the left ear. Since the accused committed the offense of rape and hence the complaint. P.W.13, Sub-Inspector of Police, reduced the statement into writing and registered a case in Crime No.3 of 2002 for an offence under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code and thereafter, P.W.14 took up the case for investigation and laid a charge sheet, proposing the petitioner/accused as guilty for the offence under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code on 26.03.2002.

3. Upon furnishing copies to the petitioner/accused under Section 207 of Cr.P.C., the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Triruvannamalai took the final report on file as P.R.C.No.18 of 2002 and upon committing the case, the Learned Sessions Judge, made over the case to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate/Assistant Sessions Judge, Tiruvannamalai and thereupon, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate/Assistant Sessions Judge, Tiruvannamalai had taken the case on file as S.C.No.163 of 2002. Thereafter, the Trial Court proceeded to frame charges under Section 376(1) of I.P.C and upon questioning, the petitioner/accused denied the charge and stood trial.

4. The prosecution examined the prosecutrix/victim as P.W.1, who deposed about the incident; The brother of the prosecutrix, who accidentally came to the spot and virtually rescued P.W.1 and tried to attack the accused, was examined as P.W.2, who spoke to that effect; one Venkatesan, the Village Assistant, who was the witness to the observation mahazar, as P.W.3; one Dhanapal, who was the witness to the seizure of MOs.1 and 2, upon the confession of the accused, as P.W.4; one Settu, who was also the witness in the seizure mahazar, pursuant to the confession of the accused, turned hostile and was cross-examined by the prosecution, as P.W.5; one Dr.Karpagam, who examined P.W.1 victim and deposed that she issued Ex.P6 medical certificate and spoke about examining the victim that there was a tear injury of 1 c.m., in the private part of P.W.1 and that her Vagina admitted two fingers, however, with difficulty and that P.W.1 had felt pain upon touching her breast, as P.W.6; one Dr.Sakunthala, Dentist, who examined P.W.1 and certified that her age would be betw