JUDGMENT : K.G. Balakrishnan, J. - The appellant Raghu Gowda was tried along with another accused by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Mysore for the offences punishable under sections 376 and 506 Indian Penal Code. The Sessions Court found the appellant not guilty and acquitted. Aggrieved by the same, the State preferred an appeal before the High Court and the High Court reversed the acquittal and found guilty of the offences charged against the accused persons and one of them, namely, Raghu Gowda has filed this appeal challenging his conviction. 2. The prosecution case is that on 25.9.1994 at about 2.00 p.m. PW-7 was collecting grass from the field belonging to her father. The appellant and co-accused came there and committed rape on her. PW-7 made a complaint to the local police station but the Station House Office PW-4 did not register a case on the basis of the complaint given by PW-7. It appears that there was some settlement talks at the instance of the DW-1 and another person, a Member of Legislative Assembly, and some others. Thereafter, PW-7 gave a written complaint to the Dy. Superintendent of Police and he received the complaint and sent the same to the Police Station and the case was registered. Thereafter, further investigation was conducted in the case. 3. PW-7 was medically examined by PW-8, a lady medical officer and one small external minor injury was found on her body. The clothes worn by the victim were sent for chemical examination. The Vaginal swab was also taken for further chemical analysis. 4. On the side of the prosecution eleven witnesses were examined and DW-1 was examined on the side of the defence. The accused when questioned under section 313, set up a defence that there was some group rivalry in the village and accused persons belonged to the opposite group and there was only some altercation between the accused and PW-7, and PW-7 made use of this opportunity to raise a false complaint regarding this and at the instance of DW-1 the matter was sought to be settled, and when that attempt failed, she made a false complaint to the police. The Sessions Judge believed the defence version and acquitted the appellant. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant and also counsel for the respondent. The Sessions Judge believed the defence version and acquitted the appellant. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant and also counsel for the respondent. The counsel for the appellant strenuously contended before us that there was only a quarrel between the accused and the PW-7 because of the rivalry, a false case had been foisted against the appellant. The counsel also pointed out that the commission of rape is not supported by any evidence and the medical evidence given by the PW-8 disproved the prosecution case. According to the appellant's counsel the evidence on record establishes that there was no rape committed against PW-7. 5. It is important to note that PW-7 categorically stated that she made a complaint to the police on the next day and as the case was not registered she had to make another complaint before the Dy. Superintendent of Police. The names of both accused were mentioned in the complaint. The defence version that there was only minor assault cannot be believed for various reasons. PW-7 gave clear evidence regarding the incident and we do not find any reason for PW-7 to set a false case before the police. Though the medical evidence given by PW-8 is not supporting the prosecution case, the report of the forensic expert, which is marked as P-9, clearly shows that some of the items sent for chemical examination were found to have presence of blood stains and seminal stains. Item No.3(ii) was one Langa (Peticot) allegedly worn by the PW-7 at the time of incident found to contain presence of blood and seminal stains. Item No.3(i) is sari allegedly worn by her at the time of incident contained stains of blood. PW-7 while giving evidence has deposed that because of the physical assault on her by the accused persons there was discharge of blood from private parts and the evidence of PW-7 is consistent with the Exhibit P-9 medical report. PW-8 the Doctor, who gave evidence, deposed before the Court that the blood stains found on the peticot was result of menstrual flow. This answer was given by her in the cross-examination but in the certificate Exhibit P-5 given by her no reference has been made regarding the nature of blood stains. Presence of blood-stains was noted in Exh. P-5 certificate, but it is nowhere stated that stains had been caused by menstrual blood. This answer was given by her in the cross-examination but in the certificate Exhibit P-5 given by her no reference has been made regarding the nature of blood stains. Presence of blood-stains was noted in Exh. P-5 certificate, but it is nowhere stated that stains had been caused by menstrual blood. The evidence of PW8 on this aspect was rightly disbelieved by the High Court. 6. The learned counsel for the appellant further contended that this is a false case at the instance of PW-7 and her relatives and the reliance was placed on evidence of DW1. We find no force in this submission. From the evidence of DW-1 it appears that at the time of settlement talk PW-7 she was forced to give a statement that she was only assaulted to which she was not willing. There is ample evidence to prove that there was commission of rape and High Court correctly appreciated the evidence and found the present appellant guilty. We find no reason to interfere and as regards sentence also we see no reason to interfere. 7. The appeal is dismissed.