The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on the victim's testimony and medical evidence in cases of sexual assault, emphasizing the absence of the need for corroboration. The court also considered the age of the accused in modifying the sentence.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Appeal has been filed under Section 374 (2) of Criminal Procedure Code, to set aside the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant herein in S.C.No.89 of 2017, by judgment dated 26.11.2019 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Dharmapuri, Dharmapuri District and acquit the appellant herein from all charges.)

1. The appellant herein is the sole accused in S.C.No.89 of 2017 on the file of Fast Track Mahila Court at Dharmapuri. He was tried for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 354, 376 IPC and Section 4 r/w 3 of Tamilnadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 1998 and found guilty of the charges and sentenced to undergo one year SI for the offence under Section 341 of IPC; and to undergo one year SI for the offence under Section 323 of IPC; and to undergo two years RI for the offence under Section 354 of IPC; and to undergo 10 years RI and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/- i/d to undergo one year RI for the offence under Section 376 of IPC; and to undergo three years RI and to pay fine of Rs.25,000/- i/d to undergo Six months RI for the offence under Section 4 r/w 3 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 1998. The sentences was ordered to run concurrently. The period of sentence already undergone by the accused is set of under Section 428 of Cr.P.C. Aggrieved by the same, the present Criminal Appeal has been filed.

2. According to the prosecution, the victim a window, aged 38 years, working as Aaya in a School on 18/03/2017 at about 2.30 pm, while walking along the road near the house of Thurvasan, near Muniappan Koil Railway line, was restrained by the accussed and pulled her saree. He tied her hand behind using the saree and gagged her mouth. He pulled her down caused head injury. The accused thereafter dragged her to nearby bush, torn her blouse and molested her breast and bite. Tried to put his penis into her mouth. He put his fingers on her vagina and manipulated her private part. The victim resisted the sexual violence and pushed the accused away, when the accused attempted to penetrate, he ejaculated and spilled the sperms over the in skirt of the victim. The accused fled from the place in his two wheeler. The victim managed to help herself, with her hands tied behind and semi dressed, she reach her home and informed her relatives and villagers. They untied her hands and took her to the hospital for treatment. The victim was examined by the Doctor at the casualty and admitted her as inpatient. Thereafter, he was examined by a Gynaecologist. She was found to have sustained violent sexual attack like bite mark on our left breast and laceration on the private part.

3. On the intimation received from the hospital, the Sub-Inspector of Police from Marahandi Police Station went to the hospital and recorded the statement of the victim. Based on the victim statement, case in Crime No: 60/2017 registered and taken up for investigation.

4. On the next day (19/03/2017), during the vehicle check up, the accused was identified by the police and when they tried to intercept him, to evade the police chasing him, he drove his two wheeler rashly and lost his balance. He fell down and broke his leg. He was rescued by the passer-bys and handed over to the police. After ascertaining his identity and his role in the crime, the accused was arrested. He was first taken to the hospital to treat the injury he sustained and thereafter remanded to judicial custody on 20/03/2017 with a memo. On completion of investigation, final report filed and based on the final report, the trial court framed charges under Sections 341, 323,354 and 376 IPC. Section 4 r/w 3 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Women Act, 1998.

5. To prove the case, the prosecution has examined 24 witnesses. Relied upon 24 exhibits and eight meterial objects. The witnesses to the prosecution are the victim, her rela