JUDGMENT :

This Criminal Appeal has been filed against the Judgment dated 31.05.2017 in Spl.S.C.No. 33 of 2015 by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Cuddalore.

2. The case of the prosecution is that at the time of the occurrence, the victim (P.W.2), who was aged about 14 years was residing at Karunghuli Village opposite to the house of the appellant. The appellant is a married man and his wife deserted him. The victim girl used to go to the house of the appellant to help his mother. One year before, when the victim girl went to the house of the appellant, the appellant had sexually assaulted her. Afterwards, whenever the victim girl went to the house of the appellant, he used to have sexual intercourse with her and threatened the victim girl to maintain secrecy in the name of honour of the family. Subsequently, she got pregnancy, the mother of the victim girl revealed the truth and thereafter, the (P.W.1) mother of the victim girl preferred a complaint to the respondent police.

3. The respondent police registered a case in Crime No.8 of 2015 for the offence punishable under Section 3 r/w 4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 [hereafter 'POCSO Act' for the sake of convenience] later altered into Section 5 r/w 6 of POCSO Act. After investigation, the respondent police filed a charge sheet before the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Cuddalore and the same was taken on file in Spl.S.C.No.33 of 2015 and charges were framed against the appellant for the offence under Section 5(j)(ii) of POCSO Act and Section 506(ii) IPC.

4. In order to prove the case of the prosecution before the trial Court, on the side of the prosecution as many as 8 witnesses were examined as P.W.1 to P.W.8 and also marked 11 documents as Exs.P1 to P11, besides one material object as M.O.1 was exhibited. After completion of the prosecution side evidences, the incriminating circumstances found from the prosecution evidence were put to the appellant/accused by examining the appellant/accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C and he has denied all the incriminating circumstances as false and pleaded not guilty. On the side of the defence, no oral and documentary evidence was marked.

5. The Court below, after hearing the arguments advanced on either side and also considering the materials available on record, found that the accused/appellant is guilty of the offence and convicted and sentenced as below:

The appellant found guilty for the offence under Section 506(ii) IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year; and for the offence under Section 5(j)(ii) of POCSO Act sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court.

6. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that during the trial, the mother of the victim girl (P.W.1) deposed that, her daughter/victim girl (P.W.2) aged about 18 years was subjected to sexual assault by the appellant, due to which she got pregnant. However, the trial Court failed to consider the evidence of P.W.1, wrongly under the assumption that as if P.W.2 is minor and convicted the appellant. He would further submit that now the victim girl's family have decided to perform the marriage between the victim girl and the appellant. He would further submit that considering the future of the victim girl, sentence imposed on the appellant may be reduced.

7. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that at the time of occurrence, the victim girl was aged about 14 years and the appellant committed penetrative sexual assault on her, due to which, she was pregnant by five months. During the trial, the victim girl (P.W.2), has clearly narrated the said incident. The Doctor (P.W.5) who has examined the victim girl, has clearly stated that the victim girl told her that she was se