JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records of the learned Judge of Mahalir Neethi Mandram, Chennai and setaside the judgment passed by the lower court in S.C.No.318 of 2011 dated 04.12.2012 and acquit the appellant from the said charges.)

1. The Sessions Judge, Mahalir Neethimandram, Chennai by judgment dated 04.12.2012 passed in S.C.No.318 of 2011 has convicted the appellant/accused for the offence under section 366-A I.P.C and sentenced him to undergo Rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to undergo six months Simple Imprisonment and under section 376 I.P.C and sentenced him to undergo ten years Rigorous Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to undergo six months Simple Imprisonment and the sentences of imprisonment are directed to run concurrently. Challenging the same, the Criminal Appeal has been preferred by the appellant/accused.

2. Briefly stated, according to the respondent police, the accused on 17.06.2010 at about 10 hours, on the false promise that he would marry the victim girl aged about 13 years kidnapped and took her to Mahabalipuram and during their stay at Mahabalipuram, the accused forcibly had sexual intercourse with the victim girl and thus had committed the offences levelled against him. The criminal action had been set in motion in the matter based on the complaint given by the victim’s mother Ashapriya [P.W.6] and the complaint lodged by her has been marked as Ex.P.6. The complaint is dated 17.06.2010. Following the same, the Inspector of Police examined as P.W.13 took up the case for investigation and subsequently as the complainant had produced the victim girl in the police station, it is found that the statement of the victim girl had been recorded and based on the same, the case which had been originally registered as ‘girl missing’ had been altered to section 363-A and 376 I.P.C and the alteration report has been marked as Ex.P.18 and thereafter arrested the accused on 21.06.2010 and the accused had tendered voluntary confession which had been recorded in the presence of independent witnesses and the clothes worn by the victim girl and the accused had been recovered based on the same and further it is putforth that the jewel mortgaged by the accused had been recovered from Pawn Broker Shop under the Seizure Mahazar Ex.P.21 and the accused had been remanded to custody and thereafter subjected the victim girl for medical examination as well as subjected the accused to medical examination for ascertaining his potency and after obtaining the same and recording the statements of other witnesses and after examining the medical officers and recording their statements, concluded the investigation and lodged the final report against the accused under sections 366-A and 376 IPC. The trial court based on the materials available on record, prima facie on being satisfied that the accused has committed offences punishable under section 366-A and 376 IPC, formulated the said charges against him and the accused had denied the same.

3. To sustain the prosecution case, P.Ws.1 to 13 were examined. Exs.P1 to P23 were marked. M.Os.1 to 7 were also marked.

4. On the conclusion of the prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under section 313 Cr.P.C qua the incriminating evidence tendered against him by the prosecution witnesses and the accused had denied the same.

5. On a perusal of the materials placed on record as above pointed out, the trial court was pleased to convict and sentence the accused as aforestated. Impugning the same, the Criminal Appeal has been preferred.

6. The case involved in the matter proceeds on the footing that the victim girl is a minor aged about 13 years on the date of the occurrence, particularly, according to the prosecution case, the accused enticed and lured the victim girl aged about 13 years that he would marry her and on that promise, kidnapped her on 17.06.2010 at about 10 h