The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on victim's testimony, medical evidence, and 164 Cr.P.C. statement to prove the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT :

M. NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to set-aside the conviction and sentence imposed in S.C. No. 32 of 2002 dated 06.09.2004 on the file of the Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Pondicherry.

1. This appeal arises out of the conviction and sentence imposed by the learned Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Pondicherry in S.C. No. 32 of 2002 dated 06.09.2004, wherein the appellant was tried for the offence punishable under Sections 366-A and 376 of IPC. The learned trial Judge has convicted the appellant for offence under Section 366-A and sentenced him to undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default, sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and for the offence under Section 376 of IPC the appellant was sentenced to undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default, sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment.

2. The facts, as projected by the prosecution are as follows:

2.1. The victim/PW-4 was studying in Wisemen Higher Secondary School, Pondicherry in 10th std and she normally goes to school at 08.30 a.m. and return back at 06.30 p.m. after attending tuition. On 17.10.2000, the victim/PW4 did not return back home and her mother/PW-2 informed PW-1/father of the victim, who was working as Cashier in RTO Office at Erode about same. PW-1 informed his wife/PW-2 to search her and he reached Pondicherry on 18.10.2000 at about 03.30 a.m. Thereafter, PW-1 and PW-2 made desperate search and came to know that their neighbour Kamaraj/appellant was also missing. PW-1 lodged complaint [Ex.P1] before PW-9 on 19.10.2000 at about 11.15 a.m. who registered F.I.R. [Ex.P9] in Crime No. 262 of 2000 for the offence under Section 363 of IPC. The date of birth of the victim/PW-4 is 24.04.1986 as per the school record [Ex.P5]. Thereafter, on registration of the case, search was made. On 08.11.2010, the appellant and the victim were secured from Pondicherry bus stand. On investigation, it was revealed that the victim was lured and kidnapped by the appellant on the pretext of meeting her father/PW-1 in Erode. But, she was taken to New Delhi by the appellant, where the appellant forcibly tied Thali and had forcible penetrative sexual assault on her. Further, the victim/PW-4 was threatened by the appellant not to inform her parents and their life would be put to danger. Finally on 08.11.2000, the victim and the appellant reached Pondicherry, from where they were secured. During this period, the victim/PW-4 was subjected to penetrative sexual assault. The appellant and the victim were sent for medical examination. PW-8 recorded 164 Cr.P.C. statement of the victim [Ex.P8]. On recording the statement of witnesses and collection of documents, charge sheet came to be filed against the appellant for the offence under Sections 363, 366-A and 376 of IPC.

3. Before the trial Court, prosecution examined 10 witnesses and marked 11 exhibits. None were examined and no exhibits were marked on the side of the defence.

3.1. PW-1, father of the victim/PW4 was working as Cashier in RTO Office at Erode. He used to visit his house in Pondicherry once in a month. PW-1’s wife/PW-2 and his daughter and son were living in Muthayalpet, Pondicherry. Both PW-1’s son and daughter/PW4 were studying in Wisemen Higher Secondary School, Pondicherry. On 17.10.2000, his daughter/PW-4 did not return back home after attending tuition. PW-2 informed the same to him. Thereafter, PW-1 reached Pondicherry on 18.10.2000 at about 03.30 a.m. made efforts in search of his daughter and found the neighbour/appellant was also missing. Hence, PW-1 lodged the complaint on 19.10.2000 [Ex.P1] before PW-9.

3.2. PW-2, mother of the victim informed PW-1 about missing of their daughter from 17.10.2000, made enquiries with the appellant’s wife and came to know that the appellant was also missing on the same day and she immediately contacted and inf