As per case facts, the appellant was convicted for sexual assault and criminal intimidation by the trial court. The prosecution alleged that the appellant entered PW1's home, sexually assaulted her, ... and threatened her. The appellant denied the charges, claiming false implication and consensual relationship, and presented a defense witness. The trial court convicted the appellant, leading to this appeal. The question arose whether, despite established physical relationship, the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the act was non-consensual to sustain the conviction. Finally, the High Court found that PW1's consistent testimony, corroborated by the accused's facial injuries from her resistance, and DNA evidence confirming physical contact, along with her immediate complaint, clearly established non-consensual sexual assault. The court dismissed the appeal, finding no infirmity in the trial court's judgment.