The central legal point established in the judgment is that consent under fear or misconception is essential to establish the offence of rape, and the court's analysis of the victim's consent and actions led to the acquittal of the accused.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 372(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 against the judgment dated 15.12.2021, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethimandram (Fast Track Mahila Court), Villupuram. in S.C.No.24 of 2018.)

1. This criminal appeal is filed against the judgment dated 15.12.2021, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethimandram (Fast Track Mahila Court), Villupuram. in S.C.No.24 of 2018.

2. The appellant is the accused in S.C.No.24/2018 and he is convicted and sentenced as detailed hereunder:

3. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined 9 witnesses and marked 8 documents.

4. The case of the prosecution as could be discerned from the prosecution witnesses is as follows:

4.1. Divya (P.W.1) is the daughter of Lalitha (P.W.2) and Balan (P.W.3). P.W.1 to P.W.3 are residing in Olliyampalayam Village, Ulundurpet Taluk and they are daily wagers doing the work of cutting brick stones. P.W.2 and P.W.3 have another son by name Ravidoss (P.W.4) who is working in Chennai for Bisleri Water Company.

4.2. The evidence of P.W.1 is that the accused used to visit her house when she was alone and also told her that he was in love with her. The accused further promised that he would marry her. On 10.02.2017, the accused came over to her house and had sex with her. When she informed her parents on the same day about this, they chided her by stating that the accused would never marry her. However, on the same night, P.W.1 left for Tiruppur with the accused Rajesh and his friend Sathish (not examined). Subsequently, one Priya, sister of the accused called his brother (accused) over phone and informed him about the police complaint given by the parents of P.W.1 and also requested him to drop back P.W.1 in her house. Accordingly the accused left P.W.1 at Arasur and she went to her sister's house at Manmedu, which is nearer to Arasur. PW-1 informed her sister about the rape committed by the accused, who in turn confronted the accused over phone for which the accused sought 10 days time to give a favourable reply. However, when PW-1 came to know that the parents of the accused are searching a suitable bride for the accused elsewhere she immediately lodged a complaint (Ex.P1) with the All Women Police Station, Ulundurpet on 21.02.2017.

4.3. Tmt.Thavamani (not examined), constable 2233, attached to All Women Police Station, Ulundurpet, received the complaint (Ex.P1) from P.W.1 and registered the same under C.S.R No.38/17. She then placed the records before Tmt. Mangayarkarasi (P.W.9), Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Ulundurpet, for investigation. P.W.9 took up investigation in C.S.R. No.38/2017 on 08.03.2017 and registered FIR (Ex.P6) in Crime No.6/2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 417 and 376 IPC and sent the FIR to the Judicial Magistrate II, Ulundurpet. Learned Judicial Magistrate II, Ulundurpet, received the complaint at 9.p.m. on 08.03.2017 in his residence.

4.4. P.W.9, the Investigation Officer went to the scene of offence on 08.03.2017, prepared an Observation Mahazar (Ex.P7) and a rough sketch (Ex.P8) in the presence of Gunasekaran (P.W.5) and Elumalai (P.W.6). Thereafter, she arrested the accused in front of his house and produced him before the Judicial Magistrate II, Ulundurpet for judicial custody. She then sent the victim to the Government Hospital, Villupuram, where Dr.Geethanjali (P.W.8) examined the victim on 23.03.2017. P.W.1 had informed the doctor that the accused, under the promise of marrying her, used to have sex with her and that on 10.02.2017, she left for Tiruppur with the accused. P.W.8, after physical examination of the vict