JUDGMENT :

T. RAJA, J.

1. Appellant is the father of the victim girl and sole accused in Spl.S.C.No. 15 of 2018 on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mahila Court Karur. He stood charged for offences under Section 5(l)(m)(n) and 6 r/w 9(l)(m)(n) and 10 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short POCSO Act). By judgment dated 20.12.2018, the trial Court convicted him under Section 5(l)(m)(n) and 9(l)(m)(n) of the POCSO Act and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for the remainder of natural life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for one month under Section 5(l)(m)(n) of POCSO Act and to undergo imprisonment for the remainder of natural life under Section 9(l)(m)(n) of POCSO Act and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant, father of victim girl, is before this Court with this appeal.

2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:

P.W.2 is a girl child aged about 14 years. She is the daughter of P.W.-1 and the accused. P.W.2 was studying 8th standard in a local School. The accused is her own father. Due to misunderstanding, P.W.-1(mother) and father/accused were living separately for the past one and a half years. Before the period of separation, it is alleged that whenever the mother (P.W.-1) went for work, victim girl (P.W.-2) and her father (accused) were alone in the house and during that time, the accused/father committed sexual assault on his own child and it is alleged that the accused frequently committed the offence in the absence of P.W.-1. Since the accused threatened the victim not to disclose it to anybody, out of fear, his daughter (P.W.2) did not disclose the occurrence to anybody. However, due to difference of opinion, after P.W.-1 and the accused were living separately, P.W.-1 noticed that P.W.2 was inconsolable for a period of ten days and on seeing her unnatural behaviour, P.W.-1 consoled the victim as to what had happened to her. However, initially, P.W.-2 was very hesitant to disclose the alleged sexual assault and on compulsion, she disclosed it to her mother that it was her father, who committed sexual assault on her taking advantage of the absence of P.W.-1/mother. Only thereafter, P.W.1 decided to make a complaint to the police. Accordingly, she made a complaint on 07.02.2018 to the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Karur.

2.1. P.W.16 the then Inspector of Police, on receipt of the said complaint, registered a case in Crime No.01/2018 under Section 5(l)(m)(n), 6 r/w 9(l)(m) (n) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. Ex.P1 is the complaint and Ex.P9 is the FIR. She forwarded both the documents to the Court and handed over the case diary to the Inspector of Police (P.W.-17).

2.2. Taking up the case for investigation, on the direction of P.W.-17, P.W.-16 prepared an observation mahazar (Ex-P.-2) and a rough sketch (Ex.P.-10) in the presence of witnesses. She examined the victim girl and recorded her statement. On 07.02.2018, at about 03.10 p.m., she forwarded the victim/P.W.2 to the Doctor for medical examination.

2.2. P.W.11 – Dr.Sujatha conducted medical examination on P.W.2 on 07.02.2018. She gave a wound certificate (Ex.P-7) and opined that P.W.2 had completed 14 years of age. She found no external injuries on the body of P.W.2 including her private parts. She found rupture of hymen in her vaginal cavity.

2.3. P.W.17 arrested the accused on the same day at 5.40 p.m. and remanded to judicial custody and thereafter forwarded him for medical examination. On 13.02.2018, P.W.10 – Dr.Shankar examined him and found that he was sexually potential. Ex.P6 is the certificate issued by him. According to his opinion, the accused was capable of performing sexual intercourse with a woman.

2.4. P.W.17 collected the medical records and examined the Doctors. Continuing his investigation, he has s