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

2023 Supreme(Mad) 3140

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
K. MURALI SHANKAR, J.
Mariappan - Appellant
Versus
The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar - Respondent
CRL.A (MD). No. 78 of 2023 & Crl.M.P.(MD) No .1396 of 2023
Decided On : 08-09-2023

Advocates appeared: For the Appellant :K. Muthumalai, Advocate. For the Respondent: R. Meenakshi Sundaram Additional Public Prosecutor.

The prosecution must prove foundational facts in POCSO cases based on a preponderance of probability. Proper investigation, including conducting a potency test on the accused, is essential. The police have a duty to find the real culprit in cases of sexual assault.

Headnote:

POCSO Act - Conviction under Sections 363 and 506(i) I.P.C., and under Section 5(l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act - [POCSO Act] - [Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 Cr.P.C.] - [Sections 363, 506(i) I.P.C., and Section 5(l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act] - The court acquitted the accused for the offence under Section 328 I.P.C. and set aside the judgment of conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court. The court directed the police to conduct further investigation to find out the real culprit within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the judgment.

Fact of the Case:

The case involved allegations of penetrative sexual assault on a 13-year-old girl resulting in pregnancy. The accused was convicted under Sections 363 and 506(i) I.P.C., and under Section 5(l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act. The prosecution's case was based on the victim's testimony and circumstantial evidence.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the foundational facts of the offence based on a preponderance of probability. The court highlighted the inordinate delay in lodging the complaint, the negative DNA report, and the lack of steps taken to conduct a potency test on the accused. The court also criticized the deficient and improper investigation by the police, directing them to conduct further investigation to find the real culprit.

Issues: The main issue was the failure of the prosecution to prove the charges under the POCSO Act and the incidental charges under Sections 363 and 506(i) I.P.C. The court also raised concerns about the conduct and character of the victim and her family, as well as the deficient investigation by the police.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for the prosecution to prove foundational facts based on a preponderance of probability in POCSO cases. It also highlighted the importance of conducting a proper investigation, including the need for a potency test on the accused and the responsibility of the police to find the real culprit in cases of sexual assault.

Final Decision: The court set aside the judgment of conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court, acquitted the accused, and directed the police to conduct further investigation to find the real culprit within a specified period.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 Cr.P.C., to call for the records pertaining to the judgment dated 14.12.2022, in Spl.S.C.No.6 of 2020, on the file of the Sessions Judge (Special Court of POCSO Act Cases), Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur and to set aside the same.)

1. The Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction passed in Spl.S.C.No.6 of 2020 dated 14.12.2022 on the file of the Special Court for POCSO Act cases, Srivilliputhur.

2. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District has laid the final report against the accused alleging the following facts: The accused is a fruit vendor, in a push cart near Thalavoipuram opticals. The defacto complainant is the mother of the victim girl. The victim girl, who has studied upto 5th std., is aged 13 years 13 days on the date of occurrence, her date of birth is 04.03.2005. The victim's brother was in the habit of receiving fruits for free from the accused. On 17.03.2018, when the brother and sister went to the push cart of the accused, he gave them fruits free of costs and informed that he would give more fruits if they come to his home on that night. The victim and her brother without informing their parents went to the house of the accused at about 09.00p.m.. On their entry, the accused locked his house from inside and gave mango juice laced with brandy, both drank the same and when they requested the accused to allow them to go to their home, the accused had beaten the victim girl on her thighs and right hand. Due to the intoxication boh had then slept off, the accused had thereafter removed the dress of the victim girl and committed penetrative sexual assault. When the victim girl woke up by 05.00a.m., the accused gave Rs.500/- and directed them not to disclose the occurrence and in case of disclosure, he threatened to kill them and their family members. Such incidents continued to happen thrice and the accused committed penetrative sexual assault, therefore, the accused has committed the offences punishable under Sections 366, 328 and 506(ii) I.P.C., and under Section 5(l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act.

3. After the receipt of the final report, the case was taken on file in Spl.S.C.No.6 of 2020, on the file of the Special Court for POCSO Act cases, Srivilliputhur. After appearance of the accused, copies of records were furnished to him under Section 207 Cr.P.C., on free of cost. The learned Sessions Judge, on perusal of records and on hearing both the sides, being satisfied that there existed a prima facie case against the accused, framed charges under Sections 366, 328 and 506(i) I.P.C., and under Section 5(l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act and the same were read over and explained to him and on being questioned, the accused denied the charges and pleaded not guilty.

4. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, had examined 14 witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.14 and exhibited 24 documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.24.

5. The case of the prosecution emerging from the evidence adduced on their side, in brief is as follows:

(a) P.W.2 is the victim girl. P.W.1 is the mother, P.W.5 is the father, P.W.3 is the brother and P.W.4 is the sister of the victim girl. They are all residing at Thalavoipuram. P.W.1 and P.W.5 had two daughtes and three sons. P.W.2 had studied upto 5th std. The accused is selling fruits in a push cart nearby Thalavoipuram opticals. Four years prior to her examination before the trial Court, she went to the accused shop along with her brother- P.W.3. The accused gave them fruits free of costs. He informed that he would give more fruits if they visit his house on that night. Accordingly, P.W.2 and P.W.3 went to the house of the accused. The accused gave juice by mixing some tablets. After taking the drink, both of them have become unconscious. Next day morning, when P.W.2 woke up, she found that her dresses were missing and she experienced pain all over her body and also found sticky fluid on

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