PW 1 lodged the first information report at the Kannamali Police Station on 2.10.1992 and a case was registered against the accused under Sections 448 and 354 IPC and Section 3 1 xi of the Act.
The C.I. of Palluruthy took up the investigation and laid the charge sheet against the accused after companypleting the investigation.
Prosecution case which led to the trial is essentially as follows While the victim PW 1 was alone in her house on 1.10.1992 at about 2 p.m. the accused entered into her house, went to the kitchen where she was companyking and attempted to catch hold of her hand, that when she attempted to escape from him by running to the front room and attempting to close the door, the accused followed her, opened the door forcibly and caught hold of and grasped her, when she made a hue and cry her brother PW 3 and other witnesses including PW 2 came there, and at that time the accused left PW 1 and pushed down PW 3 from the verandah and went along with his parents who came there hearing the hue and cry.
She is an unmarried girl and hence the family members companynselled her number to make any companyplaint about the incident to avoid publicity.
She is a married woman with children.
According to him, PW 3, the brother of PW 1 outraged modesty of the appellants sister after trespassing into their house on 27.9.1992.
Apprehending legal action against PW 3 a false case was made with the active support of a companymunal organisation against the appellant.
Aforesaid companyviction and sentence was affirmed by the High Court.
The prosecution version is that at about 2.00 p.m. on the date of occurrence i.e. 1.10.1992 accused entered into the kitchen of PW 1 and caught hold of her hands and tried to outrage her modesty.
The sister of the accused was examined as DW 1.
The information was lodged at police station on the next date.
During trial, nine witnesses were examined to further the prosecution version.
