Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Dr.Justice G.Jayachandran, Ms.Justice R.Poornima, JJ
Kumareshan – Appellant
Versus
State rep. by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(G. JAYACHANDRAN, R. POORNIMA, JJ.)
This Criminal Appeal is filed against the conviction and sentence passed against the appellant/sole accused in the judgment dated 26.10.2021 passed by the Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Pudukkottai, in Spl.S.C.No.10 of 2018 by convicting and sentencing the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 5(1), 5(j)(ii) r/w.6 of POCSO Act 2012 and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- in default, to undergo one year simple imprisonment.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the victim girl whose father was away from the home for his avocation, was being enticed by the accused with sweet words and being repeatedly exploited the carnal relationship as led to the pregnancy of the victim girl who was a minor, at that time point of time. The parents came to know about the pregnancy and thereafter, had sought criminal law into motion by way of a complaint, dated 27.02.2018.
3. The Investigation Officer had arranged for recording the statement of the victim girl under Section 161 Cr.P.C., and thereafter, proceeded further and filed a final report against the appellant herein for having aggravated sexua
The POCSO Act prohibits any sexual activity with a minor, regardless of claims of consent, emphasizing the importance of age determination through reliable documents.
In absence of proof of the victim's age, consent becomes relevant under POCSO, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
The court established that unreliable age evidence and inconsistencies in the victim's account, coupled with her prior consent, undermined the conviction under the POCSO Act.
Under protective sexual offence legislation, the consent of a minor is legally invalid. Age determination must prioritize official public documents, which are admissible without formal proof under th....
The prosecution bears the burden of proving the victim's age in cases involving the POCSO Act, and failure to do so undermines the validity of charges related to sexual offences against minors.
The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the victim's age beyond reasonable doubt, emphasizing that consent from a minor is not legally valid under the POCSO Act.
The court established that the prosecution failed to prove the victim's age as a minor, leading to the appellant's acquittal.
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
