The prosecution must prove foundational facts beyond a reasonable doubt, failing which the presumption of guilt does not apply.

JUDGMENT :

P. VELMURUGAN, J.

1. This criminal appeal has been preferred challenging the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under the POCSO Act, Chengalpattu in Spl.S.C.No.200 of 2019 dated 09.11.2023, convicting and sentencing the appellant to undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to undergo 6 months simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 366 IPC and to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to undergo 1 year rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 6 read with 5(1) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the victim-Ashwini was studying 12^th Standard in the Government Girls Higher Secondary School, Chengalpattu. The accused, being a taxi driver, was known to the victim, since she used to go to the school by bus or in the taxi of the accused. It is also stated that the accused and the victim were in love. On 17.02.2019, at about 5.30 p.m., when the victim was waiting for the bus towards her house at the Chengalpattu hospital bus stop, the accused took the victim in the taxi after informing that he would drop the victim in her house. However, the accused took the victim to a guava grove near Samuthavapuram for having a chat and though the victim refused, the accused pacified the victim by saying that he would marry her and also had penetrative sexual intercourse. At around 8.00 p.m., when the accused was informed by his friend that the parents of the victim were searching for the victim, the accused took the victim in the taxi saying that he would drop her in the Mamundur bus stand. Since there was no bus, the accused again took the victim to the guava grove and had sexual intercourse twice and were staying there till 10.00 p.m. Thereafter, the accused called his friend and handed over the taxi and took the victim in the bike brought by his friend and dropped her in the backside of her house. The parents of the victim were not available in the house, since they were searching for her whereabouts. The brother of the victim, on seeing her, informed the parents about the arrival of the victim. Thereafter, the victim informed the incident to her parents. When the parents proceeded to the Salavakkam Police Station on the next day to prefer the complaint, the Village President intercepted them and informed that he would arrange for the marriage of the victim with the accused by talking to the family of the accused and the accused also agreed to marry her. However, the accused absconded from the next day. Subsequently, the parents of the victim heard that the accused had married one of his aunt’s daughter.

3. Based on the complaint, Ex.P2 given by the de-facto complainant, who is the mother of the victim, the respondent Police registered a case in Crime No.3 of 2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 366 (A), 506(i) & 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 against the accused. On completion of the investigation, the respondent Police laid a charge sheet before the Mahila Court, Chengalpattu against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 365, 366, 376(1), 376(2)(n), 506(ii) IPC and Sections 4, 6, 8 & 10 of the. After completing the formalities, since the offence was committed under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, the case was taken on file as Spl.SC.No.58 of 2019 and thereafter, the same was made over to the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for