Back
R. SUBRAMANIAN, N. SATHISH KUMAR
Rajivgandhi – Appellant
Versus
State rep by the Inspector of Police, Pudukkottai – Respondent
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 a
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.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
