The court affirmed convictions under POCSO, emphasizing the reliability of the minor's testimony alongside corroborative evidence, permitting procedural presumptions regarding the offenses and the role of abetment.

JUDGMENT :

M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.

Challenging the judgment dated 23.11.2020 passed in Spl.C.C.No.34 of 2019 on the file of the Sessions Court, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under the POCSO Act , Coimbatore, the appellants have preferred the above appeals.

2. The brief case of the prosecution is as follows:

2.1. “X” (PW1) deposed that she is residing with her father Senthil Kumar (PW2) along with her brother at No.9/2, Mattukaraswamy Koil Street, Sugunapuram West. In 2017, she resided jointly with A1 and A2 and at that time, she was studying X Standard. On 20.06.2017, when she was with A1 and A2, while she was sleeping alone, the first accused came to her room naked, closed her mouth, removed her dresses, pressed her chest, had penetrative sexual assault with her and “X” (PW1) could neither make any sound nor breathe.

2.2. When “X” (PW1) told A2 / mother about the incident, she (A2) told her that this will happen in every place and she should not reveal the incident to anyone and if she does so, she (A2) will die and she further said that there is no one to take care of her. When “X” (PW1) said that she is going out, the second accused threatened her by saying that she will die by consuming cow dung powder. Since the first accused continued the torture, “X” (PW1) could not tolerate the same and told her mother (A2) to die as her wish and she is not a mother at all and finally went to the house of her father (PW2). The first accused had sexually abused her two or three times a week. “X” (PW1) went to her father’s (PW2’s) house on 29.08.2017 and after two weeks, she told the occurrence to PW2 and immediately PW2 asked “X” (PW1) to lodge a complaint. “X” (PW1) herself written the complaint (Ex.P2) and lodged the same before the All Women Police Station, Perur. “X” (PW1) was sent for medical examination and produced before the Judicial Magistrate for giving her statement. The statements under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was marked as Ex.P3, wherein, “X” (PW1) stated that her mother (A2) is affected by Epilepsy and she used to take tablets.

2.3 PW2- Senthilkumar is the father of “X” (PW1), who stated that the second accused is his wife and he saw the first accused at the first instance when he was hiding at his bathroom. The second accused ran a chit business and she left huge amount and he asked her not to run that business. Further she work as an agent in getting loan from Women’s Self-Help Groups and further, her health condition was not good. The second accused had illicit intimacy with the first accused. When PW2 questioned the same, the second accused said that she was only having a brotherly relationship with the first accused. On 08.02.2017, the second accused got separated from him, took a separate house at Nagarajapuram, Garden City and stayed there. On 29.08.2017 “X” (PW1) came to him and after one week, “X” (PW1) told him that the first accused misbehaved with her by narrating the entire incident and she also informed him that the first accused threatened her by saying that if she tell the incident to anyone, he would throw acid on her face. Therefore, he (PW2) took “X” (PW1) to lodge the complaint (Ex.P2).

2.4 PW3 - Jayaraman deposed that the second accused was working in a Women’s Self-Help Groups and the first accused was running a hotel and he goes to work at 6.00 a.m. and return only at night. He (PW3) thought that they (A1 and A2) were husband and wife. The second accused asked his (PW3’s) house for rent and stayed there for three to four months along with the first accused and her daughter [“X” (PW1)].

2.5 PW5-Sadhasivam deposed that he has signed in the observation mahazar (