registration in 2003 has not been shown to have raised any doubt which would need to be resolve in favour of the accused. Further more, to corroborate the fact that the complainant was under 18years at the time of the offence, the prosecution had tendered in evidence the letter from the Child Welfare Unit, Police Headquarter which was admitted without objection and marked as Exhibit 5. What is Exhibit 5 all about? It is a letter dated 23rd March 2010, addressed to the Chief Medical Director, R.V.T.H, requesting for age determination of the complainant. The result of the dental examination was noted on the said letter and the complainant’s age was given to be 17years. This piece of evidence has undisputeably established that the complainant was 16 years old or thereabout at the time of the offence in 2009 and was certainly below the age of eighteen years. I therefore find as a fact that the prosecutions has proven beyond reasonable doubt that the complainant was under the age of 16 years now 18 years as amended, at the time of the offence. That being the case, I also find that the said carnal knowledge was therefore unlawful. On the third issue of whether the accused had any reasonable cause to believe that the complainant was 18years and above. The provisor to Section 127 of the Criminal Code States: “Provided that it shall be a sufficient defence to any charge under this Section if it shall be made to appear to the court or jury before whom the charge shall be brought that the person so charged had reasonable cause to believe and did infact believe that the girl was of or above the age of sixteen years now 18 years as amended”. It is apparent that the accused is trying to take advantage of this provisor in the latter part of his evidence. It is the submission of Mr. Mbye that from the behavior of the complainant, the accused had no reason to believe that the complainant was not 18 years and above. That she had the mind set and had behaved like a woman. That the complainant who had had sexual intercourse before having same with the accused is not an innocent person. Counsel submitted that it is imperative to look at the circumstances under which carnal knowledge of the victim was had. That the complainant had answered to the invitations of the accused and had gone to see him at night, they had an intercourse and she got up and left and that was the last time they saw each other. That she was also able to hide her pregnancy for some months. On the other hand it is the submission of the prosecutions that the accused was a teacher at the very Village the complainant resided and