SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Mad) 2798

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
R. HEMALATHA, J.
Murugan - Petitioner
Vs.
The State through The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai Division, Sivagangai - Respondents
Crl.OP.(MD)Nos.1180 and 1183 of 2020 & Crl.MP(MD)Nos.510 and 511 of 2020
Decided On : 23-02-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr.K.Navaneetharaja
For the Respondent: Mr.A.Robinson, Mr.M.Jegadeesh Pandian

Headnote:

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Sections 5(f)(m)(l) and 6 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 164, 10, 9(f)(d), 313 - Scheduled Castes / Schedules Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Ordinance Amendment Act, 1989 - 3(1)(XI), (XII), 3 (2) (V) - Scheduled Castes / Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995 - rule 7(1) - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 195 (A), 201, 506(i) and 214 - School – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 138 - Headmaster - Committed Rape - Whether Court is right in thinking that new evidence is needed by it - Whether evidence sought to be led in under Section 311 is noted by Court for a just decision of a case - Whether party concerned had a fair opportunity to speak truth – Held, Court can always exercise its powers under Section 311 of Code of Criminal Procedure and merely because, accused is questioned under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure after conclusion of prosecution witnesses, it need not feel that it is powerless to allow such an application, nor abdicate its duty to arrive at truth and satisfy ends of justice - If Court feels that re-calling of witnesses is essential to arrive at just decision, it can always invoke provisions of Section 311 of Code of Criminal Procedure and therefore, orders passed by Sessions Judge is perfectly in order - In instant case, accused is a Head Master, basically a teacher - Normally, a Head Master being in such an exalted position is not expected to behave unbecoming of his position because he is a guardian for children studying in his school - A teacher is ranked next to parents in our ancient scriptures - A revered guru stooping down to level of not only allegedly exploiting girl children studying in school but also trying to cover up his misdeeds does not deserve any mercy - Trauma of sexual abuse on a child is devastating - Even a terminally ill person is not so miserable as children who are sexually abused - Mental stigma will never go away or fade - If a child misses her childhood happiness, how can Court expect to transform herself to an achiever - It is like losing a battle even before it begins and it is a permanent block - Reason for block being her own teacher is most unacceptable - Petitions dismissed.

ORDER :

These two petitions are filed by the petitioner to set aside the orders dated 12.12.2019 passed by the Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Sivagangai in Crl.MP.Nos.1934 of 2019 and 1935 of 2019, which were filed to re-open the case of the prosecution and to re-call PW1 to PW3, PW5, PW7, PW9 and PW11 respectively.

2. The case of the prosecution against the present petitioner / sole accused in SC.No.15 of 2015 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Sivagangai in nutshell is as follows: The petitioner was the Head Master of Panchayat Union Elementary School, Periyanarikottai, Sivagangai. One "X" (victim) was studying IVth standard during the alleged occurrence in the said School. She was staying in an Orphanage Home "Jebathottam Mahimai Illam" along with her younger sister "Y" who was studying IInd standard in the same school. Their paternal grandmother put both "X" and "Y" in the home as their mother left the matrimonial home. On 06.04.2015, at about 03.00 pm, the victim "X" was directed by the accused (Head Master of the school) to clean the toilet. Similarly he directed one "A" studying IVth standard to clean the garden area. When "X" went inside the toilet, the accused followed her and allegedly committed rape on her. At that time, since someone pelted stone on the accused's head, he came out of the toilet and questioned "A" and also threatened her by pinching her thighs. The accused also hit "A" on her head with his knuckle and threatened both "X" and "A" with dire consequences, if they reveal the incident. Since "X" was having severe pain in her private parts, she was crying the whole day and when she was enquired by her friends "A", "B", "C", "D" and "E", she narrated the entire incident that took place inside the toilet. According to "X", the victim the accused used to molest her friends "A" to "E". Thereafter, since she was suffering from chicken pox, she was sent back to her paternal grandmother's house at Keelapoongudi Village. When "X" was crying out of pain in her private parts, her grandmother inquisitively asked her the reason and "X" had to narrate the entire sequence of events. Consequently, the grandmother of "X" lodged a complaint against the present accused before the All Women Police Station, Sivagangai. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station registered First Information Report in Crime No.6 of 2015 against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 5(f)(m)(l) and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The statement of all the victim children were recorded by the Judicial Magistrate, Sivagangai under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and thereafter, the children were sent for medical examination. After concluding the investigation, a final report in SC.No.15 of 2015 was filed against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 6 read with 5(f)(l)(m)(o)(p) and Section 10 read with 9(f)(d) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 read with 3(1)(XI) and (XII) of the Scheduled Castes / Schedules Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Ordinance Amendment Act, 1989 and rule 7(1) of the Scheduled Castes / Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995.

3. The prosecution after examining all the witnesses closed the evidence on their side and the accused was also questioned under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with regard to the circumstances appearing in evidence against him. The Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Sivagangai after hearing arguments on both sides, reserved the case for Judgment and the case is still pending.

4. The important aspect in the instant case is that all the victim children and their respective guardians turned hostile to the prosecution and they were all cross examined by Mrs.Indragandhi, Special Public Prosecutor with the leave of the Court. The accused also cross examined the victims. Subsequently, the prosecution came to know that the accused a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top