2011CriLJ2591, 2011(2)Crimes140(SC), JT2011(4)SC2, 2011(3)KCCR1693, 2011(II)OLR(SC)172, 2011(2)RCR(Criminal)589, 2011(4)SCALE224, [2011]4SCR200, 2011(2)ACR1604(SC), AIR2011SC2564

The facts are that Rathnamma herself stated in her evidence that she had sex with the appellant on several occasions. It is also an admitted fact that the FIR against the appellant was lodged just a few days before the birth of Rathnamma’s child, which means there is delay of over 8 months in lodging the FIR. The finding of the trial court, which has not been disturbed by the High Court, is that Rathnamma was about 18 years of age at the relevant time. On these facts a view is reasonably possible that Rathnamma had sex with the appellant with her consent and hence there was 4no offence under Section 376 IPC because sex with a woman above 16 years of age with her consent is not rape.  For the reasons given above, the appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and order of the High court is set aside Apart from the above, the appellant has stated in an affidavit filed in this Court that he has agreed to transfer two acres of land situated in Palavanahalli due to breach of promise to marry Rathnamma and she has given her consent to accept the same. The appellant is directed to give/transfer two acres of land as stated in the affidavit filed before Court to Rathnamma within three months from the date of this judgment.