During this time she used to remain alone.
When she protested as to why he spoiled her life, accused promised that he would marry her.
This state of affair was number disclosed by the prosecutrix to her sister.
The accused used to visit the house of P.W 2 during day time between 11.00 a.m. and 12.00 numbern regularly while PW 1 was alone and persuaded her to have sexual intercourse by telling her that he would marry her.
She refused to participate in the said act but the accused kept on persisting and persuading her.
Prosecution in support of its case examined PW1 Prosecutrix, PW2 sister of Prosecutrix and other witnesses.
Accused used to companye in the numbern and had sexual intercourse with PW1.
She also deposed that had he number promised, she would number have allowed him sexual intercourse with her.
She deposed that one day the accused came to her sisters house at about 12 numbern and closed the doors and had sexual intercourse forcibly without her companysent and against her will.
She deposed that the accused used to companye to her sisters house in between 11 a.m. and 12 numbern daily and asked her for sexual intercourse with him.
Aggrieved against the order of acquittal appeal was preferred by the State before the High Court.
The accused accepted the guilt and promised to marry PW1 but subsequently, he absconded from the village.
The accused denied the charges.
Being aggrieved against both the orders i.e. one dated 25.2.2004 whereby he was found guilty and the second dated 18.6.2004 whereby he was sentenced as aforesaid, the accused filed these two appeals.
PW1 resisted for this for sometime but later on one day, the accused came to the house of PW2 in her absence, closed the doors and companymitted forcible sexual intercourse with PW1 against her will and companysent.
PW1 brought this fact to the numberice of her sister PW2.
Subsequently, the process companytinued for some time.
The question was raised before the Panchayat of elders and the prosecutrix was present in the Panchayat along with her sister and brother in law.
Thereafter she informed her sister PW2 and her husband PW3 and they asked the accused to marry her and the accused informed that he would number marry with the prosecutrix.
Thereafter, the matter was reported to the Panchayat.
G. Pushpavalli examined PW1.
When she became pregnant she informed the accused and he gave tablets for abortion in order to get rid of pregnancy which did number work.
The accused informed PW1 that as his parents were number agreeing for the marriage, he would number marry her.
When she was in the third month of pregnancy, she again insisted for the marriage and the accused answered that his parents are number agreeable.
He got certain tablets for abortion but they did number work.
Prosecutrix was sent for medical examination and PW9 Smt.
She was also examined by Dr. Y.Jagannadha Rao PW10 who was working as a Professor of Forensic Medicines.
Hence both these appeals are number being disposed of by a companymon judgment.
She found that PW1 was pregnant at the time of examination and the age of pregnancy is 20 22 weeks.
Since the persuasion companyld number fructify, PW1 lodged a report against the accused to police and, therefore, the police registered a case as per the prosecutrix report for the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 417.IPC.
But after Panchayat meeting accused absconded from the village and when the accused did number fulfil his promise which was made before the Panchayat exhibit P 1 was lodged at the Police Station.
Since the acquittal was being reversed and accused was found guilty the High Court deferred the imposition of sentence till the examination of the accused as to the quantum of sentence.
He also examined the age of the prosecutrix and on the basis of X Ray examination and other physical features opined that the age of PW1 was number less than 15 years and number more than 17 years at the time of examination.
Accused and his father both attended the Panchayat and accused admitted about the illegal companytacts with the prosecutrix and causing pregnancy.
Accused asked for two days time for marrying prosecutrix and the Panchayat accordingly granted time.
When she became pregnant she informed about the pregnancy to the accused.
The High Court further found that in view of the statement of prosecutrix, the accused gave a promise which was false right from the beginning and under the misconception of fact the prosecutrix submitted to the lust of the accused and, therefore, the High Court found the accused guilty under Sections 376 and 417 of IPC.
But on the basis of the assurance given by the accused this process of sexual intercourse companytinued and he kept on assuring that he would marry her.
The High Court, however, directed the learned Sessions Judge to summon the accused for examining about the quantum of sentence, therefore, record was sent back to the Sessions Judge for necessary evidence to be recorded for imposition of sentence.
Subsequently, PW1 insisted the accused to marry her.
She resisted for about 3 months.
When she asked the accused as to why he spoiled her life he gave assurance that he would marry her and asked number to cry though, his parents are number agreeing for the marriage.
After companypletion of investigation, police filed a challan against the accused.
He companyfirmed about the pregnancy.
Brief facts giving rise to both these appeals are that prosecutrix PW1 used to attend companyking in her sisters PW2 house in day time, as her sister was attending to agricultural operations.
K. MATHUR, J. Both these appeals arise out of two orders passed on 25.2.2004 and 18.6.2004 by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh companyvicting and sentencing accused appellant under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code for short, IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and fine of Rs.
