D. P. HIREMATH, J. ( 1 ) THE accused are appellants who were convicted for offences under Sections 448, 506 and 376, IPC for having trespassed into the house of the complainant- parvathamma at Aidalli Village in Chickmagalur District on the midnight of 16-1-1987 and committing rape on her after threatening her with danger to life. Each of them has been sentenced to S. I. for one year under Section 448, IPC, S. I. for one year under Section 506, IPC and R. I. for 10 years under Section 376, IPC directing the sentences to run concurrently. The prosecution case is brief and simple. P. W. 10 the prosecu trix and her husband P. W. 8 Ramesh were residing at Aidalli village doing coolie work. In the same village either in the vicinity or some distance away were also living the elder brother of P. W. 10, Chandrcgowda and another chandregowda her sister's husband as well as P. W. 2 her uncle Devegowda. At the material time they bad a son of 5 years of age and she was also carrying 4 months. Theirs was a hut, there was no facility of latching the shutters of the house, front door was only tied with a string whereas the hind shutter was closed by keeping a stick across. P. W. 8 had gone on pilgrimage to Shabarimalai about 9 or 10 days before this incident. Thus in that but were living P. W. 10 and her son P. W. 11, N. Kumar. According to the prosecution the accused trespassed into her house at midnight time threatened her at the point of knife or kathi and a club or "donne", raped her and also took promise from her that she would not divulge it to anyone and then went away. When she lit the lamp kept near her bed she identified the two accused persons. Her son who woke up was also threatened by the accused persons n0t to shout or raise alarm. After they went away she spent a sleepless night, took her bath early in the morning, washed her clothes and then went to her uncle's (P. W. 2) house who was living about 2 kms. away from her house and informed him what had happened the previous night. The accused were called to his house and they confessed before him about they raping P. W. 10. away from her house and informed him what had happened the previous night. The accused were called to his house and they confessed before him about they raping P. W. 10. There were present at that time the elder brother of P. W. 10 one Chandrcgowda, one Ramegowda and others. Shivaramu and Nageshagowda were also sent for by P. W. 2. On being told by P. W. 2 to go to the police station and file the complaint she went to the police station at Aldur about 12 kms. from that village along with one Chandregowda and filed complaint before P. W. 12 the sub-Inspector in-charge of the police station. Having registered a case he sent her for examination by a Medical Officer in the Government Hospital. P. W. 5 examined her at11. 10 p. m. but found no signs of intercourse. The accused were taken into custody the same day, after Sub-Inspector went to the village after registering the case and subjected them for medical examination at 9 p. m. before P. W. 4 the Assistant surgeon at the Genera! Hospital, Chickmagalur. On examining both of them he also found no signs of they committing rape. Her husband however returned to the village the same morning and having come to know about his wife going to Aldur to file complaint he went with his son to Aldur. On completion of due investigation charge-sheet came to be filed. ( 2 ) THE Sessions Court believing the evidence of the prosecution case found the accused guilty convicted and sentenced them as aforesaid. It is urged on behalf of the appellants by Sri A. J. Gunjal the learned counsel that the trial court was not justified in keeping unqualified reliance on the evidence of p, W. 10 the prosecutrix. The contradictions in her evidence and the allegations in the complaint, her immediate conduct after the incident, therebeing no signs of forcible intercourse on her, therebeing no satisfactory evidence as to with whom she went to the police station and filed the complaint, the trial court ought not to have believed her evidence. We have reappraised the evidence in the light of the arguments advanced. ( 3 ) WE may state at the outset that if the evidence of P. W. 10 is reliable and satisfactory no corroboration could be called for. We have reappraised the evidence in the light of the arguments advanced. ( 3 ) WE may state at the outset that if the evidence of P. W. 10 is reliable and satisfactory no corroboration could be called for. Any how there is the corroboratton to her evidence from that of her son P. W. 11. Therefore, whether her evidence should be believed to find the accused guilty is the relevant question before us. Admittedly she was 28 years of age at the time of the incident. She had a 5 years old son living with her and was carrying 4 months. Both the accused were 20 years of age as deposed to by P. W. 4. Therefore it follows that she was about 8 years older than the two accused persons. Suggestions were made to her in box that because her brother was indulging in manufacturing illicit liquor and the accused were suspected to give information to the police false case has been filed. We do not attach much importance to such suggestions to these witnesses because if at all a false case could be foisted it could be of some other nature but not of a rape involving the chastity of a woman. Therefore we have only to see if there is atleast possibility of therebeing a voluntary consent on the part of P. W. 10 for sextual submission to the accused persons. There is no explanation coming forth as to what impelled her to clean herself before going to her kith and kin. Thus when the Doctor examined practically there were no signs of intercourse on her. She has deposed falsehood that she was examined by the lady Doctor at Aldur Hospital soon after she filed complaint but according to P. W. 12 there was no lady Doctor at Aldur Hospital and he had sent her to the Doctor at Chickmagalur Government Hospital. When she has made such a false statement cannot be made out and even if it could be brushed aside as a version given to make her more reliable and truthful we have to see if her evidence is inherently incapable of being given unqualified reliance. It has come in evidence that her brother Chandregowda was living at a distance of 20 Marus away though at one stage she has stated that 2 Furlongs away. It has come in evidence that her brother Chandregowda was living at a distance of 20 Marus away though at one stage she has stated that 2 Furlongs away. There is also a house of one Pillai in the vicinity. The learned State Public Prosecutor from the evidence told us that chandregowda P. W. 3 was not in the village that night but returned the same morning at 7,30 a. m. Even then she could have approached him immediately with tell talc circumstances on her person of being the victim of rape. Instead of that she goes to her uncle 2 kms away at 10 a. m. and complains before him. She does not raise any hue and cry immediately after the accused left. That was not a solitary house in the locality though not a cluster of houses. There were a few houses in the neighbourhood but she did not raise any alarm atleast after the accused left the house. What she alleged in the complaint filed immediately is most material which directly contradicts with what she stated in court. She made a brief complaint that when she was alone in the house that night both the accused rushed into her house armed with a kathi and club, pointed out them to her and by force committed rape on her. In court however she gave evidence that there was no facility of latching the shutters of her house, front door was only tied with a string whereas the hind shutter was closed by keeping a stick across. At night when she was asleep she fell like some one lying on her. However she identified that they were Malayalee people of the house where she used to go for sweeping. They also told her not to raise any cry and that they would leave the place after accomplishing the purpose for which they entered the house. Thus one of them unbuttoned her jacket had intercourse with her by lifting her pitticoat and thereafter the other person had also intercourse. Her son who woke up in the meanwhile cries "amma Amma" and then they threatened him with danger to his life in case he shouted. They also threatened him that in case he shouted his mother also could be killed. This is now her son was quietly lying. Her son who woke up in the meanwhile cries "amma Amma" and then they threatened him with danger to his life in case he shouted. They also threatened him that in case he shouted his mother also could be killed. This is now her son was quietly lying. When the other accused person was raping her, the first one was silting nearby. After everything was over, that is, after intercourse was over, she woke up and then lit the lamp nearby. A-1 Ramesh compelled her to take oath that she would not disclose it to any one or else he would take her life. This is how she gave him a word on oath that she would not divulge. After lighting the lamp she saw a sickle and club lying nearby. Having taken a word from her, both of them left the house. The reason given by her for taking a bath and washing her clothes cleanly to get them dried was that the clothes were soiled perhaps due to this act of the accused persons. ( 4 ) TO assess the credibility of P. W. 10 and her sonp. W. 11, the court must take into consideration the conduct of the accused and other attendant circumstances. We do reiterate that the evidence, of the victim of alleged rape should receive due attention and value, but at the same time when it comes to the question of appreciation of evidence, the court must also apply its mine to see if the victim is really raped, because such a charge to be made is as easy as also serious and grave. Such acts do not generally take place the public gaze and possibility of others witnessing the same are too rare to expect. Possibility of consent is always one consideration that should weigh because the very offence of rape involves forcible sexual intercourse, if both are adults. It has been suggested to P. W. 10 that she was not a woman of virtues and even her sister Indira had incestuous connection with T. D. Chandrcgowda whom she later married. It was suggested to P. W. 10 that she eloped with Chandregowda and lived in a Chickmagalur lodge, which she denied. It has been suggested to P. W. 10 that she was not a woman of virtues and even her sister Indira had incestuous connection with T. D. Chandrcgowda whom she later married. It was suggested to P. W. 10 that she eloped with Chandregowda and lived in a Chickmagalur lodge, which she denied. But P. W. 2 her uncle very clearly admits that she did elope with him, stayed in a lodge at Chickmagalur and thereafter himself and her elder brother informed police and then their registered marriage was brought about. For reasons best known to P. W. 10 she flatly denied this fact. It appears these accused or atleast accused No. 1 and P. W, 10 were known to each other for long. Even in her evidence she stated that Malayali people to whose bouse she was going for sweeping were there in her house to rape her. It was also suggested to her that as her husband was a drunkard and because he used to pick up quarrels with her after coming drunk she was in the keeping of accused No. 1, which of course she was denied. The accused were unmarried at that time and accused No. 1 was living with his grandmother. However, it appears A-1 and his grandmother were living separate in separate rooms adjacent to each other. It was also suggested to her that his grandmother had advised her not to quarrel with her husband but to pull on cordially with him. It was also suggested to this lady that even before her marriage she was pregnant and carrying 6 months. It was also suggested that her elder brother got her aborted and then drove her out of the house. Suggestions so doubt many a time cannot be taken on the face value and always such suggestions may not have the semblance of truth. But it may also happen that suggestions have some semblance of truth, though witness denies them from the witness box and ultimately whether a suggestion carries any weight or not should be considered in the light of the circumstances of the case and conduct of the witnesses. ( 5 ) WITH regard to the filing of the FIR, at 3-30 p. m. or in the morning though the same came to be filed in the police station, the evidence is not foolproof and finds satisfactory. ( 5 ) WITH regard to the filing of the FIR, at 3-30 p. m. or in the morning though the same came to be filed in the police station, the evidence is not foolproof and finds satisfactory. Who accompanied P. W. 10 to the police station is not uniformly stated and there were material contradictions in this behalf. T. D. Chandregowda happens to be the husband of her sister Indira. Chandregowda-P. W. 3 is her elder brother. P. W. 10 stated in the court that it was P. W. 3 who accompanied her to the police station after he came from Kundoor the same morning. P. W. 3 has also given evidence in this behalf. He testified that be came back from Kundoor that morning and on his return P. W. 2 had sent for him through T. D. Chandregowda. When he went there, there were present both the accused, his sister P. W. 10, his younger brother and many other village people. In his presence the accused were asked by p. W. 2 if they had entered into the hut of P. W. 10 the previous night and committed rape on her. They admitted. Thereafter P. W. 2 asked him that they could not do anything in the village and complaint had to be filed in the police station. Therefore, they filed the complaint Exh. P. 5 in the police station. In the examination in chief itself it is not stated that he and P. W, 10 went to the police station immediately. However, in the cross-examination he deposed that he and P. W. 10 went to the police station at 10 a. m. reaching it at 11 a. m. and at that time P. W. 10 had also taken her son (P. W. 11) to the police station. On the way at Aldur market the complaint was got written. One of their relatives got the recitals written and he happened to be from Aidalli. Admittedly he Is T. D. Chandregowda. There are more reasons than one as to why this witness cannot be believed. When he swears that he had gone to the police station along with P. W. 10, it is the uniform evidence of the prosecution witnesses that the son of P. W. 10 had not accompanied her to the police station. Admittedly he Is T. D. Chandregowda. There are more reasons than one as to why this witness cannot be believed. When he swears that he had gone to the police station along with P. W. 10, it is the uniform evidence of the prosecution witnesses that the son of P. W. 10 had not accompanied her to the police station. On the other hand it was P. W. 8 her husband who returned to the village from shabrimalai and then having come to know that his wife had gone to the police station, he took his son and went to the police station. At the time he reached the aldur police station a complaint had already been filed. P. W. 10 herself though stated initially that her brother had accompanied her to the police station, she admitted in the cross-examination that till noon time on that day as P. W. 3 never returned to the village, P. W. 2 advised her to take T. D. Chandregowda with her and this is how T. D. Chandregowda accompanied her to the police station. She again confirms the same version by asserting that after the complaint was filed she was sent to a Lady Doctor at Aldur and when she was examined by lady doctor T. D. Chandregowda was present. By him, she means the husband of her younger sister indira. She even went to the extent of saying that till she left Aldur police station, her brother P. W. 3 never went to the police station at all. However, after her husband went to the police station with her son, his statement was recorded. P. W, 2 also confirms and supports the same version by stating that the elder brother of P. W 10 had not returned from Kooduvalli and therefore he had not accompanied her to the police station. By Chandregowda who had accompanied P. W. 10 he means the husband oflndira the younger sister of P. W. 10. What is more intrigueing is many of these people who had collected near the house of P. W. 2 were literate and even so t. D. Chandregowda. According to P. W. 2, Shivaram, Nageshgowda, chandregowda and another elder brother of P. W. 10 and many others were present. All of them suggested that the complaint should be given to the police station. According to P. W. 2, Shivaram, Nageshgowda, chandregowda and another elder brother of P. W. 10 and many others were present. All of them suggested that the complaint should be given to the police station. Even then it is ununderstandablc as to why none of the persons present there wrote the complaint to be taken by P. W. 10. It has remained mysterious as to who exactly wrote the contents of the complaint, which was treated as an First Information report. Both P. Ws. 3 a nd 10 do not give the name of the person who wrote it, though according to them it was got written in the market at Aldur. Even the person who is said to have narrated the contents of the complaint, though a relative of these two witnesses was not named and was not examined. At one state P. W. 3 went to the extent of saying that they reached the police station at 11 a. m. at any rate the complaint according to P. W. 12 was received at 3-30 p. m. and the case came to be registered. It was suggested to him that including P. W. 2, he and others were gaining time to give a shape to the case. It is for this reason, according to the learned counsel for the appellant that even though as admitted by P. W. 10, P. W. 2 and others were present in the police station. that evening itself statements of none of them was recorded. Therefore, though the allegations in the complaint do make mention that both the accused threatened her with danger to life and committed rape on her, it is not possible to make out when this story came to be spinncd out. ( 6 ) P. W. 3 swears that he returned to his village at 7. 30 a. m. His house was quite near to that of P. W. 10. Therefore, the story of P. W. 2 and others that he did not return up till 12 noon does not find corroboralion in the evidence of P. W. 3 itself. If that be so, p,w. 10 could have been the first person to immediately rush to his house and told him what all had happened. He also admits that in the neighbourhood lives one malayali Shivarampillai. If that be so, p,w. 10 could have been the first person to immediately rush to his house and told him what all had happened. He also admits that in the neighbourhood lives one malayali Shivarampillai. Inspite of such a ghastly act having taken place, P. W. 10 takes everything quietly, washes her clothes, dries them up and then goes to P. W. 2 at about 10 a. m. This at any rate could not have been the conduct of a woman who was forcibly raped at the point of a deadly weapon at midnight time. We have to appreciate the evidence of P. W. 11 in the light of the very circumstances referred to above. According to him at midnight time both the accused entered into their house and threatened his mother, he shouted and he was also threatened. When his mother lit the lamp, he saw A-l sitting near her head, whereas another accused was sitting near the stove. There were lying nearby a sickle and a club. They made her take oath in the name of Manjunathaswamy and then left the house. He again adds that when she shouted he woke up and saw A-l falling on his mother. He admitted that he knew both the accused for 3 years before. He saw the accused only after his mother lit the lamp. He admitted thai if no lamp was lit, no one could be able to recognise who were in the house at night time. He again added that after lighting the lamp, his mother lied down and accused No. 1 had been seen on his mother even before lighting the lamp. Left to themselves the contradictions in the evidence of a boy of his age, could not have assumed much importance if his evidence could have established that at any rate he did see both the accused in the house that night and threatened his mother even after the act of intercourse was over. But from his evidence it could be gathered that when he woke up and saw in the light of the lamp, both of them were sitting at different places and were taking oath from his mother. Possibility of the two accused entering into the house of P. W. 10 that night cannot be totally ruled out. But from his evidence it could be gathered that when he woke up and saw in the light of the lamp, both of them were sitting at different places and were taking oath from his mother. Possibility of the two accused entering into the house of P. W. 10 that night cannot be totally ruled out. At the same time cither for the reason that P. W. 11 had seen what was going on or for the reason that this act of P. W. 10 had attracted the attention of some one else, she came forward with the story of the accused committing rape on her by threatening her being projected, cannot be totally ruled out The subsequent conduct of P. W. 10 does not make her evidence only reliable and credible so as to accept the same and find the accused guilty. As we have already stated earlier, she has stated total falsehood that she was sent to a lady Doctor at Aldur itself soon after the complaint was filed. If it was a fact non-examination of her again leads to an adverse inference and if it is not a fact then she is stating a total falsehood. In any event she cannot be considered as a truthful witness. In our view the Sessions Court ought to have appreciated the evidence of P. W. 10 in the light of the serious infirmities pointed out by us and the possibility of the two accused being at her invitation in the absence of her husband cannot be totally ruled out. If that possibility or probability can be said to loom large under the circumstances, the accused should be entitled to the benefit of the same. In our view therefore, the prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond doubt. ( 7 ) APPEAL is allowed. The judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court are set aside and the accused are acquitted of all the charges. The bail bonds executed by them shall stand cancelled. --- *** --- .