JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 378 Cr.P.C., to allow the appeal and set aside the acquittal judgment dated 30.04.2008 in S.C.No.372 of 2005 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Chennai and convict the respondents/accused as charged.)

1. This Criminal Appeal has been filed under Section 378 of Cr.P.C. by the prosecution/complainant/State represented by the Inspector of Police, W-1, All Women Police Station, Thousand Lights, Chennai–600 006, questioning the judgment dated 30.04.2008 in S.C.No.372 of 2005 passed by the Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Chennai acquitting the accused therein of all charges.

2. For the sake of convenience even though the complainant is the appellant and the accused are the respondents in this appeal, their nomenclature in accordance with the Sessions Case would be used to describe them.

3. A final report had been filed by the Inspector of Police, W-1, All Women Police Station, Thousand Lights, Chennai, before the XIV Metropolitan Magistrate Egmore, Chennai, against A1 - Radhakrishnan, A2 - Kittu @ Chinnakozhandai alleging offence under Section 376(1) IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 1998 and under Section 506(ii) IPC against A1 and under Section 376(1) IPC r/w Section 109 IPC and under Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 1998 and under Section 506(ii) IPC against A2 and A3.

4. In the final report, it had been stated that the Inspector of Police, W1-All Women Police Station, Thousand Lights Chennai, had registered a FIR in Crime No.16 of 2005 on a complaint given by PW-1 Lakshmi, Project Co-ordinator of Child Line, Chennai.

5. During the course of investigation into the allegations, it had transpired that A1 Radhakrishnan had sexually exploited several young girls in his native village at Vaniyambadi and in pursuant to such investigation, it had been stated in the final report that A1 who was working as Inspector in Customs Department, in September 2003, when a minor victim Z was studying in 7th standard, during the quarterly examination holidays, when she was in the house with her parents at her villlage in Vellore District, A1/Radhakrishnan and A2/Kittu @ Chinnakuzhandai had gone to the house and had informed the parents that they would give education for Z and would take adoption of Z and giving false promises, had taken the minor girl Z to the farm house of A1 at Sangilikuppam. A1 had then taken her to his room, tied her legs, gave her an injection and raped her. Thereafter, A1 took Z to his house at No.31/9, 8th Street, Sowrashtra Nagar, Choolaimedu, Chennai and again gave a drugged injection and again forcibly raped her. Thereafter, he gave Rs.50/- to A2 and directed him to leave Z in her house. He then threatened her and if she stated about these facts to anybody, nobody would survive in her house.

6. In view of the above facts, it had been alleged that A1/Radhakrishnan had committed offences under Section 376(1) IPC and under Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 1998 and under Section 506(ii) IPC and A2/Kittu @ Chinna Kozhandai had committed offences under Section 376(1) r/w Section 109 IPC and under Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 1998 and under Section 506(ii) IPC.

7. The final report was presented before the XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore. It was taken on record as PRC No.190 of 2005 and since the offences were triable exclusively by a Court of Sessions, it was committed to the Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Chennai by the XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore Chennai. On committal it was taken cognizance as S.C.No.372 of 2005.

8. Summons were issued to the accused who appeared. Documents were furnished to them under Section 207 Cr.P.C.

9. The following charges were framed against the accused.

Charge-1 against A1 under Sections 376(1) IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 1998.

Charge -2 against A1 un