BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
R. SUBRAMANIAN, N. SATHISH KUMAR, JJ.
Rajivgandhi - Appellant
Versus
The State rep by the Inspector of Police, Pudukkottai - Respondent
Criminal Appeal(MD) No. 354 of 2021
Decided On : 21-04-2022
POCSO Act - Sexual Offences - Section 5(1), Section 6(1) - Section 363 IPC
Fact of the Case:
The accused was convicted for offences under Section 5(1) and Section 6(1) of the POCSO Act and Section 363 of IPC for sexually abusing and kidnapping a minor girl. The prosecution proved the guilt of the accused through witness testimonies and medical evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the accused guilty of the offences under the POCSO Act but acquitted him of the offence under Section 363 IPC. The court also reduced the life sentence to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment considering the relationship between the accused and the victim girl.
Issues: Inconsistencies in witness testimonies, validity of consent due to the victim girl's minor status, and the use of the two finger test in medical examination.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need to protect the dignity of the child victim and banned the practice of the two finger test on victims of sexual offences by medical professionals.
Final Decision: The conviction and sentence for the offence under Section 363 IPC were set aside. The conviction for the offences under Section 5(1) and 6(1) of the POCSO Act was confirmed, and the life sentence was reduced to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment. The fine and default sentence were also confirmed.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, against the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge (Mahila Court), Pudukkottai, in Special S.C.No.2 of 2021, dated 05.05.2021.)
R. Subramanian, J. & N. Sathish Kumar, J.
1. The accused who has been convicted for life sentence which would be till the end of the life time for the offences under Section 5(l) read with Section 6(1) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for brevity, ''POCSO Act'') with a fine of Rs.1,00,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months and 7 years rigorous imprisonment for an offence under Section 363 of IPC along with a fine of Rs.20,000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months, has come up with this appeal.
2. The case of the prosecution is as follows:-
The accused who was running a tailoring shop in Perambur Village, Viralimalai Taluk, Pudukkottai District, had befriended the victim girl aged about 16 years when she went for tailoring training for about two months. The accused had enticed the girl and had sexually abused her. When the accused attempted to talk to the victim girl over cell phone at odd hours, her mother deprecated the practice and thereafter stopped the girl from attending the tailoring classes. However, the accused on 05.12.2020 came near the house of the victim girl and enticed her to meet him near Sengulam. The victim girl had left the house under the pretext of getting some old clothes stitched at about 04.00 p.m. Since she did not return for a long time, the father of the victim girl/PW1 went in search of her and was not successful. He, therefore, lodged a complaint with the respondent/Police under Ex.P1 on 06.12.2020 at about 10.00 a.m. Thereafter, on the same day, the Police called him and asked him to come near the Mathur E.B office. When he went there, he found his daughter with the Police. The victim girl was taken for medical examination. Upon medical examination, it was found that the accused had penetrative sexual intercourse with the victim girl. PW10-Inspector of Police, on receipt of a complaint had enquired PW1 and other witnesses on the same day and recorded their statements. He had also arrested the accused who attempted to escape when he was on a routine vehicle check on Trichy-Mavur road. The confession made by the accused was recorded by him and on the basis of the confession, the two wheeler bearing registration No.TN-42-R-4966 used by the accused to take the victim girl was seized from the accused. He had also taken the minor girl for medical examination and recorded the statements of the Doctor and the Constable who took her for medical examination. upon request, Section 164 statement of the victim girl was recorded on 21.12.2020. The accused was medically examined on 23.12.2020 and the report of the Doctor was also taken. The statement of the Doctor who had examined the accused, was recorded on 04.01.2021. Upon completion of the investigation, he laid a charge sheet charging the accused for the offences stated supra.
3. The accused denied having committed the crime. In order to prove the guilt, the prosecution, before the trial Court, examined as many as 10 witnesses and marked Exs.P1 to P12. The motorcycle was marked as MO1 and the CD was marked as MO2. The accused did not adduce either oral or documentary evidence.
4. The learned Sessions Judge upon consideration of the evidence on record, concluded that the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused. Taking note of the fact that the accused had repeated sexual intercourse with the victim girl, the trial Court found that the accused is guilty of the offence under Section 5(l) of the POCSO Act. The Court also found that the accused is guilty of kidnapping a minor girl and as such, he has committed an offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC. Upon such conclusion, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the accused for the offences and sentenced h
AI
The court emphasized the protection of child victims and banned the practice of the two finger test on victims of sexual offences by medical professionals.
Penetrative sexual assault – Two finger test and its interpretation violates right of rape survivors to privacy, physical and mental integrity and dignity – Two finger test cannot be permitted to be ....
Conviction under IPC 363, 376 and POCSO Section 4 upheld for enticing minor (under 18) by suicide threat and penetrative sexual assault; consent immaterial; victim's corroborated testimony and medica....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on documentary evidence, such as the victim's school certificate, and the testimony of the victim to determine the accused's guilt und....
As per definition of Section 361 of IPC, if a minor was abducted from guardian, it amounts to an offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC.
The appellate court upheld the victim's minority and the accused's guilt for kidnapping and sexual assault, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the need for compelling reasons to overturn ac....
The reliability of the prosecutrix's testimony and the admissibility of res gestae evidence were central to the court's decision.
(1) Consensual sexual intercourse is not rape.(2) Rape – Two finger test in private part of victim is not permissible under law.
The conviction for sexual offences against minors can rely on circumstantial evidence and victim testimony, reinforced by medical reports, even amidst witness hostility.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.