J U D G M E N T

This appeal has been preferred challenging the judgment of the learned Fast Track Mahila Court (Sessions Judge), Vellore dated 03.10.2018 passed in SC.No.114 of 2016.

2. The victim is mentally retarded at a moderate level. The case of the prosecution is that approximately six months prior to 28.08.2013 one day at about 6.00.p.m when the victim girl was walking through the jungle of her village, the accused forcibly took her to a nearby bush and raped her. Thereafter, he repeatedly raped her by giving false assurance to her that he would marry her. In view of that, the victim girl got conceived. The accused threatened the victim that if she dared to tell his acts to anyone, he would kill her. However, on 28.08.2013 the victim girl (PW1) gave a complaint (Ex.P1). On the basis of her complaint, PW8 registered a case in Crime No.195 of 2013 of Bharatharami Police Station under Sections 376 and 506(i) IPC and the FIR was prepared by the Inspector of Police (PW8).

3. The case was taken up for investigation by PW9-Shri.V.Rani, Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Polur by assigning a new Crime No.15 of 2013. She visited the place of occurrence, prepared the Observation Mahazar (Ex.P4) along with the Rough Sketch (Ex.P16) and enquired the witnesses. At about 5.00.p.m on 29.08.2013, she arrested the accused near Gudiyatham new bus stand and recorded his confession statement and then sent him to judicial custody. She also subjected the victim and the accused for medical examination. The statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C of the victim girl (Ex.P2) was also recorded by the learned Magistrate. After getting necessary medical documents from the Doctor, she examined the accused and the victim. Subsequently she got transferred and the Inspector K.Shanthi (PW10) succeeded her and continued the investigation. PW 10 completed the investigation by examining the rest of the witnesses and filed the charge sheet against the accused for the offences under Sections 376(2)(k), 376(2)(m), 417 and 506(ii) IPC.

4. After taking the case on filed and after observing the legal mandates and on being satisfied with the materials placed on record, the learned trial judge framed charges against the accused under Sections 376(2)(k), 376(2)(m), 417 and 506(ii) IPC. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. During the course of trial, on the side of the prosecution, 10 witnesses were examined as PW1 to PW10 and Exs.P1 to P16 were marked. On the side of the defence, no witness was examined and no document was marked.

5. The complainant was examined as PW1 and she had stated in her evidence about the occurrence. PW2/Brother of PW1 has stated that he came to know from the doctor that PW1 was pregnant. After enquiring the victim, he came to know that the accused is the reason for the pregnancy. PW3 is the witness for Observation Mahazar (Ex.P4). PW4/K.Dhanasekaran is the Village Assistant, in whose presence the confession statement of the accused was recorded. PW5 is the Doctor, who examined the accused with regard to his potency and he gave his opinion that there is nothing to suspect that the accused is impotent. When the victim was produced before PW6/Doctor, she recommended the victim to be examined by a psychologist, Gynaecologist, Radiologist and Dentist.

6. According to the Dental examination, the age of the victim is found to be above 14. Since the victim was pregnant, Radiological examination could not be done. PW7/Doctor, who examined the victim girl had observed that the victim girl is mentally retarded and she recommended for psychiatric examination. Her psychiatric examination revealed that her mental age was 7 years.

7. After concluding the Trial and on considering the materials on record, the learned Trial Judge found the accused guilty and convicted and sentenced him as under: