The High Court found no sexual intent in the appellant's actions, leading to the acquittal, as witness inconsistencies and familial relationships undermined the prosecution's claims.

JUDGMENT :

M. NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

1. Assisted by Ms.Harshana.T JUDGMENT The appellant/accused in Spl.S.C.No.78 of 2020 convicted by the Trial Court by judgment dated 22.06.2022 for the offence under Section 10 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) and sentenced to undergo seven years imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/-, in default, to undergo three months simple imprisonment. Aggrieved against the same, the appellant preferred the present appeal.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the victim/PW2 is the grand daughter of the defacto complainant/PW1. The victim's mother Reshma was married to one Askar Ali and out of this marriage, the victim was born to them. Some years after the marriage, the said Askar Ali had a fall, sustained head injury and he was mentally affected. Thereafter, the victim and her mother were living with the defacto complainant. When the victim was 1½ years old, the victim's mother Reshma married the appellant and they were living separately. When the victim was studying 4th standard, the victim's mother took the victim to her house and victim staying with her mother and step father. Thereafter they were living happily and the defacto complainant used to visit her daughter and grand daughter. One year prior to the complaint, the defacto complainant's second daughter/PW5 informed that the appellant was misbehaving with the victim. The defacto complainant questioned the same, thereafter the defacto complainant was not allowed visit her daughter and grand daughter and started visiting her granddaughter in the School. Three days prior to the complaint when the defacto complainant visited her grand daughter in the School, the victim complained that her step father/appellant was sexually assaulting her and threatened not to disclose to her mother, further the victim was beaten using the back of the broomstick and the victim had contusions. Hence, on 02.08.2019 the defacto complainant lodged a complaint to the respondent, who assigned C.S.R.No.61 of 2019. After enquiry, case in Crime No.2 of 2019 for offence under Section 8 of POCSO Act registered by PW6. Thereafter, investigation conducted, the victim, defacto complainant and other witnesses enquired, statements recorded, the victim was produced for medical examination and thereafter produced before the Magistrate, 164 statement recorded, the accused was arrested on 16.09.2019 and produced for medical examination on 25.10.2019. On the point of jurisdiction, the case was transferred to All Women Police Station, Washermenpet. PW7 on conclusion of investigation filed charge sheet in this case on 20.08.2020. During trial PW1 to PW7 examined and Ex.P1 to Ex.P12 marked on the side of the prosecution and on the side of the defence, no witness examined and no documents marked. On conclusion of trial, the Trial Court convicted the appellant as stated above.

3. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the appellant is the step father, who married mother of the victim when the victim was 1½ years infant and the victim was brought up by her maternal grandmother/PW1. The victim's mother/wife of the appellant was insistent to taken back her daughter and the defacto complainant objected, finally when the victim was about 9 years old, the victim was taken by her mother and from then, victim was with her mother and the appellant all staying together. The appellant was taking care of her, providing all her needs and sending her to School. The victim was not showing much interest in her studies which was questi