JUDGMENT :

This appeal is preferred against the judgment in S.C.No.35 of 2015 on the file of I-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Medak at Sanga Reddy, dated 18.06.2019, whereby, the accused was found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(F) of IPC and accordingly he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. However, the accused was not found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 6 of POCSO Act.

2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell is that the accused has committed rape on the victim girl. PW-1/father of the victim, preferred a report, basing on which, a case was registered against the accused in Crime No.87 of 2015 of P.S. Sanga Reddy (Rural), for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(F) of IPC and also under Section 6 of POCSO Act.

3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as Sri S.Ganesh, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1-State.

4. PW-1 is the father of the victim girl; PW-2 is the victim; PW-3 is the mother of the victim girl; PW-4 is the sister of the victim; PW-5 is the Nephew of PWs.1 and 3; PW-6 is the brother-in-law of PW-1, who turned hostile and Ex.P-2 is marked through him; PW-7 is the panch witness to the scene of offence and Ex.P-3 is the scene observation report and seizures are made as per Ex.P-4; PW-8 is the person who acted as panch witness for the arrest of accused and seizure of the motorcycle; PW-9 is the woman Inspector of Police, who recorded the statement of victim girl and seized the dress of the victim girl under Ex.P-4; PW-10 is the Doctor who examined the victim and opined that the incident might have occurred and Ex.P-6 is the report given by her; PW-11 is the Sub-Inspector of Police who registered the case and issued Ex.P-7/FIR; PW-12 is the investigating officer, who investigated the case and filed charge sheet against the accused for the aforesaid offences.

5. The case of the prosecution is that 19 days prior to the incident, the marriage of the accused was performed with PW-4, who is the elder daughter of PWs.1 and 3. Whenever the accused used to come to the house of PW-1, he used to comment on the victim stating that she was looking good. On 26.03.2015 at about 3 p.m., the accused came to the house of PW-1 and informed that PW-4 was suffering from ill-health and asked her to take to hospital. On that, PW-1 along with PW-3, her two daughters and the accused came to Sanga Reddy. As there was scarcity of money, they went to local pawn-broker’s shop to mortgage the ear-tops of PW-4. In the meanwhile, the accused took the victim girl/PW-2 on his motorcycle from the old bus stand stating that she will be given fruit juice. After an hour, while PW-1 and the family members were waiting, the accused dropped the victim girl and fled away. PW-1 and others noticed the victim crying and her clothes were torn. When confronted, she told that the accused took her to a newly developed venture on his motorcycle, threatened her to listen to him, otherwise he will kill PW-4, took her forcibly by holding hands into the bushes, pushed her on to the ground and forcibly committed rape on her. PWs.1 and 3 went home, seriously thought about the future of PW-4 and finally on the night of 27.03.2015, went to the Police Station and preferred a report. Basing on it, PW-11/the Sub-Inspector of Police registered the case. PW-12 took up investigation and during the course of investigation, he recorded the statement of PW-1, basing on the information given by the Woman Sub-Inspector of Police/ PW-9. On 28.03.2015, they visited the house of the complainant/ PW-1, inquired with PW-2, recorded her statement and further seized the clothes of the victim, which were alleged to have been washed by her mother i.e. PW-3, recorded the statements of witnesses. Later observed the scene of offence,