The court held that a conviction under sexual assault charges must rest on credible evidence, finding the testimonies in this case to be influenced by personal motives and thus unreliable.

JUDGMENT :

SUNDER MOHAN, J.

This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the sole accused, challenging the conviction and sentence imposed upon him for the offence under Section 323 of the IPC and Sections 10 and 12 of the POCSO Act, 2012, vide judgment dated 23.02.2023 in Spl.SC.No.5 of 2021, on the file of the learned Special Judge (Under the POCSO Act 2012) Principal Sessions Judge, Puducherry.

2. (i) The case of the prosecution is that the appellant is the father of the victim girl; that a few years prior to 15.04.2020, the appellant had sexually assaulted the victim girl, who was aged 8 to 9 years at the time of occurrence and aged 13 years at the time of filing of the complaint; that he had inappropriately touched the private part of the victim girl and made the victim girl touch his penis on several occasions; that after the victim girl attained puberty, the appellant made the victim girl to read pornographic books; that the appellant on one occasion peeped into the bedroom of the victim girl, while she was changing her dress after a bath; and thus, committed the offence under Sections 11 (i) and 12 of POCSO Act, 2012.

(ii) On the complaint [Ex.P1] given by PW1, the mother of the victim girl, an FIR [Ex.P7] in Cr.No.116 of 2020 was registered on 29.08.2020 by PW7, the Sub Inspector of Police. PW8-Sub-Inspector of Police took up the investigation and after examination of the witnesses and on completing other formalities such as recording the Section 164(5) Cr.P.C. statement of the victim girl, altered the sections of law and filed the final report on 29.10.2020 against the appellant for the offence under Sections 10 and 12 of the POCSO Act.

(iii) The case was taken on file as Spl.S.C.No.5 of 2021 for trial by the learned Special Judge [under the POCSO Act, 2012] Principal Sessions Judge, Puducherry. The trial Court framed charges against the accused for the offences under Sections 10 and 12 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 323 of the IPC and when questioned, the accused pleaded 'not guilty'.

(iv) To prove its case, the prosecution had examined 8 witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.8 and marked 11 exhibits as Exs.P1 to Ex.P11, besides 1 material object, viz., M.O.1. When the accused was questioned, u/s.313 Cr.P.C., on the incriminating circumstances appearing against him, he denied the same. The accused examined two witnesses as D.W.1 and D.W.2 and marked 3 documents on his side as Ex.D1 to Ex.D3.

(v) The trial Court found the appellant guilty of the offences under Sections 10 and 12 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 323 of the IPC and accordingly, convicted and sentenced him as stated below:

Aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, the accused had preferred the instant appeal.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the complaint lodged by PW1 (mother of the victim), with whom he had matrimonial differences, is attended with malafides; that the complaint was lodged only after the appellant had filed a petition for divorce; that prior to filing of the complaint, PW1 had filed a suit in OS No.55 of 2020 for injunction before the Family Court (Pondicherry); that in the said suit there is no reference to any of the alleged sexual as