J U D G M E N T

This Criminal Appeal has been filed to set aside the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Chennai in Spl.S.C.No.65 of 2020, dated 23.09.2021.

2. The respondent police registered the case in Crime No.02 of

2020 for the offence under Section 9(m) which is punishable under Section 10 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. After completing the investigation filed the charge sheet before learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, since the offence is against a child.

3. The learned Sessions Judge after completing the formalities framed the charge against the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 10 of POCSO Act, 2012.

4. After framing the charge, in order to substantiate the charge framed against the appellant, during the trial, on the side of the prosecution as many as 7 witnesses were examined as PW 1 to PW 7 and 7 documents were marked as Ex. P1 to P7. No material object was marked on the side of the prosecution.

5. After completing the examination of prosecution witnesses, when the incriminating circumstances culled out from the evidence of prosecution witnesses were put to the appellant by questioning under Section 313 of CrPc, he denied the same as false and pleaded not guilty.

On the side of the defense, 16 documents were marked as Ex.D1 to D16.

6. On completion of trial, hearing the arguments advanced on either side and considering the materials, the trial court found guilt of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 10 of POCSO Act, 2012 and the accused was convicted and sentenced to undergo 5 years of imprisonment and pay fine of Rs.5,000/-in default to undergo further period of 1 month simple imprisonment.

7. Challenging the said judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court, the accused has filed the present appeal.

8. The case of the prosecution is that the parents of the victim were separated each other due to difference of opinion between themselves. Thereafter, they decided to get a divorce by mutual consent. At the time of lockdown, the mother of the victim left her daughter to the father. Since, the parents of the victim were working, the father of the victim used to leave his daughter in his sister's house. The appellant who is a close relative and by relation grandfather to the victim and maternal uncle to the father of the victim was also in the house. When the victim was studying LKG, the son of the appellant and the victim were playing hide and seek, the appellant showed his private part in the bathroom and he made the victim girl to touch it. Again on another occasion, when the victim girl was studying 3rd standard, the appellant hugged the victim from the back and touched her vagina. Thereafter, the victim informed the same to her mother who is PW1 herein. PW1 lodged a complaint before the respondent police. The respondent registered the case in Crime No.02 of 2020 for the offence punishable under Section 10 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

9. The learned counsel for the appellant would vehemently contend that PW1 who is the mother of the victim had an illegal intimacy with some other person and she did not like the father of the victim. There was a frequent quarrel between them. Thereafter, she left the matrimonial house and she was living with the other person. PW1 suppressed the fact that she already got married with the father of the victim and she got a child, the victim. She made the other person to believe that she is a spinster and therefore marriage was arranged between her and the other person. However at one point of time, the boy came to know that she already got married and he refused to marry her. Therefore, the mother of the victim got enmity with the father of the victim and appellant's family and she foisted a false case against the appellant. He would further submit that the mother of the vic