Credibility of witness testimony, impact of minor contradictions, and the significance of delay in lodging a complaint in cases of sexual offences against children.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: This Criminal Appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. to set aside the judgment passed by the Sessions Court, Magalir Neethi Mandram, Fast Track Mahila Court at Erode in Spl.S.C.No.45 of 2020 dated 28.07.2022 by which convicting the appellant for the offence under Section – 5(m) punishable under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual offences Act – 2012.)

1. Challenging the impugned judgment dated 28.07.2022 passed in Spl.S.C.No.45 of 2020 by the Sessions Court, Magalir Neethi Mandram, (Fast Track Mahila Court), Erode, the present criminal appeal has been filed.

2. The fact of the case is that the appellant is an accused in Spl.S.C.No.45 of 2020 on the file of the Sessions Court, Magalir Neethi Mandram, (Fast Track Mahila Court), Erode. The victim child is aged about 12 years and the accused is her relatives. On 24.11.2019 at about 5.00 p.m. when the victim was alone in her house, the accused entered into the house and locked the door and hugged and kissed her and pressed the breast and removed the dresses and had pressed his penis into her vagina. Thus, he committed penetrative sexual assault upon the victim child. Thereafter, the victim child informed her mother immediately and her mother lodged a complaint. In pursuance of the complaint, a case has been registered by the respondent police in Crime No.406 of 2019. After investigation, the respondent police filed the final report before the trial Court, which was taken on file in Spl.S.C.No.45 of 2020.

3. In the trial Court, the prosecution examined eleven witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.11 and marked sixteen documents as Exs.P1 to P16. On the side of the accused, no oral and documentary evidence were marked.

4. The trial Court by considering the entire oral and documentary evidence on record found guilty of the accused under sections 5(m) punishable under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual offences Act, 2012 and convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 20 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to undergo 3 months simple imprisonment and found not guilty for the offence under 506(i) IPC. Aggrieved against the findings of the trial Court, the present appeal has been filed.

5. The learned counsel for the appellant/accused submitted that the trial Court failed to note the material discrepancy in the evidence on record. The finding of the trial Court is erroneous and against the evidence on record. Only on sympathy, convicted the accused. The mother of the victim child (PW1) had an illegal relationship with one another person, which was condemned by the family members and the husband of PW1 gave a complaint against PW1 in this regard. Therefore, he was not examined as a witness in this case. Further, there was a delay of one day in filing the complaint. PW1’s sister Lakshmi PW5, who is working in the police station and in the police quarters and by using her influence, complaint has been falsely registered. The trial Court without considering any evidence found guilty and convicted the accused and thus, pleaded to acquit the accused and to allow the appeal.

6. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) for the respondent supported the findings of the trial Court and submitted that the trial Court considered the entire evidence on record and the contradictions relied on by the accused are not in material particulars. The minor contradictions cannot be a ground to discredit the testimony of the prosecution witnesses. The victim child PW2 clearly deposed about the incident and there is no merit in the criminal appeal and no ground to interfere with the findings of the trial Court and thus, pleaded to dismiss the criminal appeal.

7. I have considered the matter in the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) for the respondent.

8. On perusal of the records, it is seen that the victim child is studying at Bangalaputhur school.