From the side of the prosecution, PWs1 to 8 were examined and Exh.
Even after this incident, he had sexual relationship with her on more than one occasions.
PW2 then lodged a companyplaint on 26.7.1998 before the Assistant Sub Inspector of Police, Cheemeni Police Station and on the basis of that companyplaint, police registered Crime No.
According to the prosecution, on 17.9.1997 at about 8.30 AM, when she was proceeding to the Khadi Centre from her house, the accused, a friend of her brother, caught hold of her by hand and forcibly took her to the nearby property of one Karunakaran and companymitted rape on her, without her companysent.
After investigation, the police filed a report charging offences under Sections 376 and 417 IPC against the accused.
PW2, later, became pregnant and gave birth to a boy on 24.6.1998 in the Government Hospital, Payyannur.
The trial Court after appreciating the evidence took the view that subsequent companytact of the parties cannot be taken as a ground to infer companysent for the incident, which occurred in August 1997.
She tried to make a hue and cry, but was silenced by the accused by stating that he would marry her.
But, on the date of the incident, even though she made a hue and cry, she was threatened and told number to disclose the incident to anybody and also made to believe that he would marry her.
PW3, mother of PW2, as well as PW4, the father, deposed that they came to know of the incident only when PW2 became pregnant and only after the delivery of the child they approached the police station to lodge a companyplaint.
PW2 deposed that she had previous acquaintance with the accused being his brothers friend.
When questioned under Section 313 Cr.
64 of 1998.
P1 P4 were marked.
Accused number only number kept his promise to marry her, but even disputed the paternity of the child.
The case was tried by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kasaragod.
P.C., the accused denied all incriminating evidence.
S. Radhakrishnan, J. Leave granted.
This appeal has been filed by the accused who was companyvicted for an offence punishable under Section 376 IPC and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for seven years.
Facts leading to this appeal are as follows PW2, the prosecutrix, was employed in a Khadi Centre, Kayoor and residing at Arakachal along with her parents, brothers and sisters.
