Order : (Arvind Kumar Verma, J.) 1. This criminal appeal has been preferred by appellant against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 04.12.2021 (Annexure A-1) passed in Session Trial No. R.93/2016 by learned Sessions Judge, Balrampur-Ramanujganj (CG), whereby appellant has been convicted as under :- Conviction Sentence U/s 450 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) Rigorous imprisonment for 03 years & fine of amount Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine 15 days additional imprisonment. U/s 506-II of IPC RI for 01 year & fine of amount Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine 15 days additional imprisonment. U/s 376 of IPC RI for 10 years & fine of amount Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine 30 days additional imprisonment. All sentence run concurrently 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is this that on 06.10.2016, appellant committed rape with the prosecutrix in her room, when he committed sexual intercourse with her, husband and brother- in-law of prosecutrix came there and caught him raid-handed and took him to the police station. Based upon report, FIR was registered and he has been taken in custody. 3. On completion of investigation, challan/charge sheet was filed against the appellant) and based upon which, trial Court framed the charges. 4. Prosecution in order to prove its case examined total 14 witnesses. Statement of appellant (accused) was also recorded under Section 313 of CrPC in which he denied all incriminating evidence appearing against him, pleaded innocence and false implication. However, no evidence was adduced by him in his defence. 5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and appreciating the evidence available on record, the trial Court vide impugned judgment convicted and sentenced the accused/appellant in the manner as described in Para-1 of this judgment. Hence this appeal. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned judgment is per se illegal and contrary to the evidence available on record. As per the statement of the prosecutrix, at the time of incident, her 04 children was sleeping in the same room, where the incident occurred, despite that, none of the children were awoke in spite of the alarm raised by the prosecutrix. Medical evidence does not support the version of the prosecutrix. As per the statement of the prosecutrix, at the time of incident, her 04 children was sleeping in the same room, where the incident occurred, despite that, none of the children were awoke in spite of the alarm raised by the prosecutrix. Medical evidence does not support the version of the prosecutrix. Moreover, it appears that the accused came there on the invitation given by the prosecutrix because at that time her husband and brother in law had gone to see the orchestra. Prosecutrix in her evidence has admitted the appellant/accused did not commit the incident by using force or coercion upon me. Hence, looking to the entire evidence, either it appears that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case or it is a case of free consent. Hence, prayed that impugned judgment be set- aside and acquit the appellant from the aforesaid charges/offences. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State supporting the impugned judgment and submits that the prosecutrix was subjected to forcible sexual intercourse by appellant. Being so, the impugned judgment is strictly in accordance with law and the present appeal is liable to be dismissed. 8. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the recorded placed on record. 9. With regard to the incident, PW-1/Prosecutrix in her Court 10. In view of above evidence of prosecutrix, it is evident that alleged incident took place in room of the prosecutrix where 04 children were also sleeping, but how it is possible that despite alarm raised by the prosecutrix, none of the children were awoken, hence, it is well established the appellant had not committed forceful sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix, however, physical relationship was developed with the free consent of the prosecutrix. 11. Looking to the contradiction and exaggeration in the evidence of the prosecutrix, her conduct during the alleged incident and subsequent thereto coupled with the medical evidence which also lends no support to the prosecution case, it is clear that the prosecutrix was a consenting party in this case to the act of the accused person. 12.In the given set of facts and circumstances of the case, no offence as alleged against the appellant is made out. 13.Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment Annexure P-1 is hereby set aside. The appellant is acquitted from the aforementioned charges/offences. 12.In the given set of facts and circumstances of the case, no offence as alleged against the appellant is made out. 13.Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment Annexure P-1 is hereby set aside. The appellant is acquitted from the aforementioned charges/offences. He is reported to be on bail, hence, his bail bonds stand cancelled and surety, if any, stands discharged. 14.Record of trial Court alongwith copy of this judgment be sent back immediately to trial Court concerned for compliance and necessary action.