JUDGMENT

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 12.04.2012 and the order of sentence dated 17.04.2012, passed in S.C.No.150/2010 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Puttur. The appellant – accused has been acquitted of the offences under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’) and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and nine months and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months for the offence under Section

354 of IPC.

2. The factual matrix of the prosecution case is as under;

PW-1 is the prosecutrix and she is the daughter of PWs.5 and 11 and she works in a Cashew Nut Factory. On

28.06.2010, the appellant – accused on the way to the village from Puttur, met PW11 and said that he is going outside Padnoor on his work and requested to send his daughter PW1 – prosecutrix to his house, so as to give company to his lonely wife. Upon such request, PW11 through his wife PW5 in the evening when the prosecutrix returned from her work told her about the request of the appellant – accused and asked her to go to the house of the appellant-accused. Hence by 7.30 p.m., the prosecutrix left the house and went to the house of the appellant – accused. When she reached the house, the appellant – accused alone was present and he said that his wife is taking bath inside the house and she was made to sit inside the house. While so, the appellant – accused who was outside, came inside the house, closed the front door, started touching her. She objected and tried to move out of the house. At that time, the appellant – accused physically caught hold of her, gagged her mouth by his hands and pulled her to the ground and by removing her chudidar pant as well as her inner wear, did committed sexual assault against the prosecutrix. While doing so, he has committed criminal intimidation against the prosecutrix from disclosing this to her family members. By such acts of the appellant – accused, the prosecutrix has raised the alarm by hue and cry, this was heard by the neighbour – PW4, who immediately called PW2, the neighbour of PW11 to alert the family members of the Prosecutrix. PW10 and PW3, the relatives of the prosecutrix rushed to the house of the appellant – accused and found the prosecutrix standing and crying out side the house and she did not disclose anything and they brought her to the house. The parents and brother of the prosecutrix did observe changes in her conduct and inferred that some bad has happened to her in the house of the appellant – accused and she is not disclosing it to them. Hence, they requested their relative – PW8 to enquire, and on her enquiry, the prosecutrix did disclose as to what has happened to her in the hands of the appellant – accused. PW8, inturn brought it to the notice of the family members. Thereupon, the family members took the prosecutrix to the police station and filed the complaint.

3. Charge sheet has been filed against this appellant – accused for the offences under Sections 376 and 506 of IPC. The prosecution, in order to prove the charge, has examined PWs.1 to 12 and got marked Exs.P1 to P13 and MOs.1 to 4. The statement of the appellant – accused has been recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C . The appellant – accused got examined one Smt.Keshavathi as DW1. The said Smt.Keshavathi is the wife of the appellant – accused. The Trial Court, after hearing the arguments has formulated the points for consideration and after appreciating the evidence on record, by the impugned judgment has acquitted the appellant – accused of the offences under Sections 376 and 506 of IPC and convicted him for the offence under Section 354 of IPC. The said judgment of conviction and order of sentence has been challenged by the appellant – accused in this appeal.

4. Heard learned counsel for the appellant – accused and learned High Cour