SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Mad) 605

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.T. SELVAM, N. SATHISH KUMAR, JJ.
Srinivasan – Appellant
Versus
State rep. by its Inspector of Police All Women Police Station Sathyamangalam Erode District – Respondent
Crl.A. No. 276 of 2017
Decided On : 21-02-2018

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :M/s. T. Muruganantham, Advocate.
For the Respondent: V. Arul, Addl. Public Prosecutor.

The judgment emphasizes the reliability of the victim's testimony and the medical evidence in cases of sexual assault, highlighting that no leniency should be shown to offenders in such cases.

Headnote:

Rape - Sexual Offences - Indian Penal Code, Section 376(2) - Protection of Children Sexual Offence Act, 2012 - [IPC 376(2), POCSO Act] - The court found the appellant guilty of the offence under Section 376(2) IPC and Section 6 of the Protection of Children Sexual Offence Act, 2012. The victims, aged about nine years, were lured to the accused's house and subjected to sexual assault. Medical evidence supported the prosecution's case, establishing the offence of rape. The court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the conviction and sentence, emphasizing that no leniency could be shown to the offender.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant was tried for the offence of rape under Section 376(2) IPC [2 counts]. The victims, aged nine years, were lured to the accused's house under the pretext of giving sweets and were subjected to sexual assault. The mothers of the victims lodged complaints, and medical examinations supported the allegations.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the appellant guilty of the offence of rape based on the evidence of the victims, medical reports, and witness testimonies. The court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the conviction and sentence, emphasizing that no leniency could be shown to the offender.

Issues: The key issues included the delay in filing the FIR, the credibility of the victims' testimony, and the medical evidence supporting the allegations of sexual assault.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that delay in lodging the complaint in sexual offence cases cannot be fatal, considering the reluctance of the victims' families and the societal implications. The court also highlighted the reliability of the victims' testimony and the medical evidence in establishing the offence of rape.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal, confirming the judgment of conviction and sentence, and directed the appellant to undergo the period of sentence awarded.

JUDGMENT :

N. Sathish Kumar, J.

The appellant/sole accused was tried in SC.No.165/2015 for commission of the offence u/s.376[2] IPC [2 counts]. The Trial Court, vide judgment dated 16.03.2016 found the appellant/accused guilty of the said offence and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment each count and pay fine of Rs.100/- for each count. Sentences to run concurrently. The sentences was ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, the present appeal came to be filed by the appellant herein.

2. Since the victim of rape are minor female children of PW3 and PW4, their names will not be referred by us and PW1 & PW2, the mothers of the respective female children are also referred only as PW1 & PW2.

3. The brief facts of the prosecution case as follows:

PW1 is the mother of the PW3. PW2 is the mother of the PW4. Both children are aged nine years. Both the children were studying together in the Sathyamangalam Municipal Primary School. On 17.06.2015 at about 7.00 p.m. PW3 informed PW1 about pain in her private part. On enquiry, PW3 informed that under the pretext of giving sweets, the accused took PW3 and PW4 to his house and committed rape on PW3 & PW4.

4. Thereafter, PW1 lodged a complaint (Ex.P1) on the next day, i.e., on 18.06.2015, after giving it a day’s thought. Similarly, on 18.06.2015, PW4 also informed her mother-PW2 about the pain in her private part. When enquired, PW4 stated that the accused under the pretext of giving sweets, took her and P.W.3 to a petty shop and purchased some sweets and thereafter, took them to his house under the pretext of giving more chocolates and committed the act of rape.

5. PW3 & PW4, the child witnesses, aged about 9 years, despite the cross examination after observing necessary precaution by the Trial Court, in one voice, have stated that on 17.06.2015 after school hours, the accused took them to a nearby petty shop and purchased some chocolates. Thereafter, he took them to his house, under the pretext of giving them some more chocolates and he removed the dresses of PW3 & PW4 and placed his private part over the private parts of PW3 & PW4.

6. PW5 who owns a petty shop in front of the school, has seen PW3 & PW4 studying in the school. The accused used to bring many children to the petty shop and give them sweets. On 17.06.2015, the accused brought PW3 & PW4 to his shop, gave Rs.20/- and purchased sweets for Rs.14/-. Thereafter, collecting the change, he took the minor female children with him.

7. PW6 is the owner of the house, where the accused was residing as a tenant. According to her, the accused resides in her house as a tenant for a monthly rent of Rs.3,000/-.

8. PW7 is the mother of one Jayashree, the student of the same school. On 17.06.2015, she came to the school to pick her daughter. At the time, she saw the accused taking PW3 & PW4 in his motorcycle.

9. PW14, after receipt of the complaint from PW1, registered the crime in Crime No.18/2015 under Section 376(2)(1) IPC and also under Section 6 of the Protection Of Children Sexual Offence Act, 2012. Ex.P11 is the F.I.R. PW15, the Inspector of Police took up investigation and went to the place of occurrence on 19.06.2015 and prepared a rough sketch [Ex.P.--] and observation Mahazar [Ex.P.--]. PW14 in the presence of PW8, arrested the accused on 19.06.2015 at about 4.00 p.m., and sent him for medical examination and also to the Court and also made a necessary request to record the statements of the children u/s.164 Cr.P.C.

10. In the meanwhile, PW9, the Medical Officer of the Government Hospital, Sathyamangalam, examined PW3 and issued Ex.P5., Accident Register Copy, wherein, she had noting down the following:

“Nature of Injuries Treatment: Alleged H/O rape on 18.06.2015 at about 04.20 pm in the accused (Srinivasan) house Thirunagar Colony, Sathyamangalam by unknown one male person, RP-90/mt.

Investigations: O/E-Baby conscious, concluded/as/S1S2 present/RS (n.c) Present PA-Soft/CVS ? Present.

L/E-1. Pubic hair absen





























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top