J U D G E M E N T

This Criminal Appeal has been filed against the judgment dated

11.01.2021 passed in Special S.C.No.74 of 2018 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Fast Track Court, Krishnagiri.

2. The respondent police registered a case in Crime No.5 of 2018 against the appellant for the offence under Section 5(l) read with 6 and under Section 5(j)(ii) of POCSO Act and 506(ii) IPC. After investigation, laid a charge sheet before the learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Fast Track Court, Krishnagiri, since the victim is a child under the definition of POCSO Act. The learned Sessions Judge taken the charge sheet on file in Special S.C.No.74 of 2018. After completing the formalities, framed the charges against the appellant for the offence under Sections 5(l) read with 6, 5(n) read with 6 and 5(j)(ii) read with 6 of POCSO Act and 506(ii) IPC. After framing charges and completing all the formalities, during trial, in order to substantiate the charges, on the side of the prosecution, totally 21 witnesses were examined as P.Ws.1 to 21 and 29 documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P29. On the side of the defence, no oral and documentary evidence was produced.

3. On completion of trial and hearing the arguments advanced on either side and considered the entire materials, the Special Court found the accused guilty for the abovesaid charges and convicted and sentenced him to undergo 14 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.25,000/- in default to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 5(l) read with Section 6 of POCSO Act. Further, he was convicted and sentenced to undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 5(n) read with Section 6 of POCSO Act and he was convicted and sentenced to undergo 14 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 25,000/- in default to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 5(j)(ii) read with Section 6 of POCSO Act. Further, he was convicted and sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to undergo two months rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 506(ii) IPC. Aggrieved over the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Fast Track Court, Krishnagiri in Special S.C.No.74 of 2018, the accused has preferred the present Criminal Appeal before this Court.

4. The specific case of the prosecution is that the appellant is the uncle's son of the victim. Victim has completed 9th standard and going to 10th standard. During that time, the appellant under the guise of marrying her, had sexual intercourse with her on several occasions and also threatened her as to if she reveal the same to anybody, he will set fire on her. Since the appellant repeatedly had sexual intercourse on her on several occasions, she become pregnant. Hence complaint has been lodged as against the appellant before the respondent police. The respondent police registered the case and investigated the matter and laid a charge sheet before the trial court. After trial, the trial court convicted the appellant for the abovesaid charges.

5. Learned Legal Aid Counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that there was a delay in filing the complaint and sending the F.I.R to the Court, which will vitiate the case of the prosecution. The inordinate delay was not explained. Therefore, the unexplained delay in filing the complaint is fatal to the case of the prosecution. The alleged occurrence had not taken place as projected by the prosecution. Since the victim and the appellant are relatives, the alleged occurrence has taken place with the consent of the victim girl only. Age of the victim girl has not been proved. Unless ascertaining the age of the victim, offence under POCSO Act would not attract. The prosecution has not proved its case beyond reasonable doubt that at