J U D G M E N T

This Criminal Appeal has been filed against the Judgment dated

20.01.2021 in Spl.C.C.No.29 of 2018 by the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Namakkal.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the victim girl, who is aged about 10 years at the time of occurrence was studying 5th standard. On 26.01.2014 at about 11 a.m., when the victim was playing in front of her house, the accused, who is the neighbour of the victim girl took her to his house and made the victim girl to lay on a cot, hugged her, opened her tops, lifted her skirt and sexually harassed her. The next day i.e. on 27.01.2014 at 4.00 p.m the accused with an intention to sexually harass the victim girl called her to his house, the victim girl refused to go with the accused and he threatened her. On 28.01.2014, again the accused followed the victim girl and on seeing the said incident, P.W.2/mother of the victim girl questioned her and that the victim girl narrated the said incident to her mother. Thereafter, P.W.2/mother of the victim girl filed a complaint against the appellant before the respondent police.

3.The respondent-Police registered a case in Crime No.49 of 2014 against the appellant for the offence under Section 354 and 506(i) IPC subsequently it was altered into Sections 3 and 4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 [hereafter referred to as 'POCSO Act' for the sake of convenience] later altered into Section 7 r/w Section 8 of the POCSO Act and Section 506(i) IPC. On completion of investigation, the respondent police filed a charge sheet before the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Namakkal and the same was taken on file in Spl.C.C.No.29 of 2018. After completing the formalities, the trial Court framed charges against the appellant for the offences under Section 7 r/w 8 of POCSO Act and Section 506(i) IPC.

4.In order to prove the case of the prosecution before the trial Court, on the side of the prosecution as many as 9 witnesses were examined as P.W.1 to P.W.9 and also marked 10 documents as Exs.P1 to P10 and no material object was marked. After examining the prosecution witnesses, incriminating circumstances culled out from the evidence of the prosecution witnesses were put before the appellant/accused and he was questioned under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., wherein he denied all the incriminating circumstances as false and pleaded not guilty. On the side of the defence one witness was examined as D.W.1 and also marked one document as Ex.D1 and no material object was marked.

5. The Court below, after hearing the arguments advanced on either side and also considering the materials available on record, found that the appellant is guilty for the following offences and imposed sentences as follows :

(i) For the offence under Section 7 r/w 8 of POCSO Act the appellant was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months.

(ii) For the offence under Section 506(i) IPC, the appellant was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year;

6.Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court with this Criminal Appeal.

7.1 The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that there was a delay in filing the complaint and the same has not been properly explained by the prosecution and the unexplained inordinate delay is fatal to the case of the prosecution. The case of the prosecution as per the de facto complainant/P.W.2 is that on 26.01.2014, while the victim girl aged about 10 years was playing in front of her house, the appellant took the victim to his house and sexually harassed her. In the sequence on 27.01.2014, the appellant threatened the victim girl not to disclose the previous day incident to anybody. On 28.01.2014, when the appellant called the victim girl to his house, she refused to go with him, the