Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
B.Pugalendhi, J
V.Abin Vijay – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by The Inspector of Police – Respondent
ORDER
The petitioner / appellant is the first accused in Crime No.7 of 2017 and he was charged for the offence u/s.366(A). 376 , 506(i) IPC , Section 5(I) r/w 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Protection of Harassment of Women Act , in SC.No.25 of 2017. The trial Court, in conclusion of the trial, found him guilty and convicted and sentenced him. As against the conviction and sentence, the petitioner has preferred Crl.A(MD)No.623 of 2024. Pending the appeal, the petitioner has moved Crl.MP(MD)No.7472 of 2024 seeking suspension of sentence. Considering the fact that it is a case of love affair, this Court, by order dated 28.08.2024, allowed that application.
2.The petitioner has also moved this application to accept additional evidence, namely, birth certificate and Aadhar identity card of the victim girl, to substantiate his case that the victim girl was major at the time of occurrence.
3.Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the age of the victim was above 18 years at the time of occurrence and therefore, the provisions of POCSO Act will not attract at all. However, the trial Court has found the petit
The court ruled that the School Leaving Certificate and Higher Secondary documents are superior for age determination, while the Aadhar card is not conclusive proof of date of birth.
Proper determination of the victim's age is crucial for POCSO Act applicability and correct trial proceedings, requiring verification by UIDAI when conflicting evidence exists.
Bail application – FIR registered under Sections 363/366/376/506 IPC read with Section 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 – Proper determination of age of victim is important from jurisdictional perspective which ....
The court affirmed the accused's right to summon evidence for their defense, highlighting the importance of fair trial principles in ensuring justice.
The court ruled that credible primary documents are essential for age determination, emphasizing the Aadhar card's validity over school records in the absence of supporting evidence.
The significance of the victim's consent in the alleged offense is determined by her age, as recorded in official documents such as the School Register.
The court ruled that the prosecutrix was above 18 years and a consenting party, negating the applicability of POCSO Act provisions.
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
