BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

24.04.2024 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN Crl.A.(MD).No.349 of 2022 Ganesan ..Appellant Vs.

State rep.by the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Sattur, Virudhunagar District.

(Crime No.1 of 2017) .. Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(4) of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records and set aside the judgment and conviction dated 21.04.2022 by the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, 2012, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur made in Special Sessions Case No.18 of 2017 and acquit the appellant.

For Appellant :Mr.T.J.Ebenezer Charles Fro Respondent :Mr.B.Nambiselvan Additional Public Prosecutor

JUDGMENT

This Criminal Appeal has been filed to set aside the impugned order passed in Spl.S.C.No.18 of 2017, dated 21.04.2022, on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, 2012, Srivilliputhur, Virudhunagar District and acquit the appellant in connection with Crime No.1 of 2017, on the file of the respondent police.

2. The appellant, who is the sole accused in Spl.S.C.No.18 of 2017 on the file of the Special Court for POCSO Act cases, Srivilliputhur, filed this criminal appeal challenging the conviction and sentence imposed against him by the Special Court for POCSO Act Cases, Srivilliputhur. The learned trial Judge convicted the appellant for the offence under Section 450 of IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act 2012 and sentenced him to undergo 7 years imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of fine, to undergo 6 months of imprisonment.

3. According to the prosecution, the appellant is aged about 24 years, residing at Karuppasamy Temple Street, Ameerpalayam Village, SatturTaluk, Virudhunagar District. On 23.01.2017, at about 01.00 a.m, when the victim girl was going to attend nature's call, the appellant gagged her mouth and committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault. At that time, the mother of the victim girl intervened and made valiant attempt to save her daughter from the clutches of the accused. However, the accused escaped from the scene of the occurrence. Thereafter, the victim girl gave the complaint to the jurisdictional police and the complaint was received by P.W.17. Thereafter FIR was rregistered by him. The FIR was transmitted to P.W.18/investigating officer. The investigating officer, after receiving the FIR, conducted an investigation by arresting the accused and producing the victim girl for recording the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C.He also sent her for the medical examination and collected all the medical reports and filed the final report before the court below for the alleged offence under section 5(l) r/w 6 of the POCSO Act. The same was taken on file in Spl.S.C.No.18 of 2017. Thereafter, the offence was altered into 450 IPC and 6 r/w 5(i) of the POCSO Act. Thereafter, the respondent police arrested the appellant and completed the investigation and filed the final report before the learned trial Judge. The learned trial Judge took the final report on file in Spl.S.C.No.18 of 2017. The learned trial Judge issued summons to the accused. After his appearance, the trial Judge served the copies under Section 207 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, he framed necessary charges and questioned the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty and hence the trial was commenced against the accused.

4. To prove the case, the prosecution examined PW.1 to PW.18 and Ex.P1 to Ex.P14. The learned trial Judge, thereafter, questioned the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C, by putting the relevant question and the accused denied the same as false and thereafter, the case was posted for examination of the witnesses on the side of the accused. The accused neither produced any documents nor examined any witnesses on his side.

5. The learned trial Judge, on considering the evidence of witnesses and documents convicted and sentenced the app