IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Reserved on : 27.04.2021 Pronounced on : 03.09.2021 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP Crl.A.(MD) No.220 of 2016 Kanagaraj S/o.Rajendra Kumar ..Appellant/Accused Versus The State rep by The Inspector of Police All Women Police Station South Madurai.

(Crime No.3 of 2009) ..Respondents/Complainant This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to set aside the Judgment of conviction and sentence passed in S.C.No.227 of 2010 dated 17.05.2016 on the file of the learned District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Madurai.

For Appellant :: M/s. A. S. Rajeswari for Mr.M.Jegadesh Pandian For Respondent :: Mr. K. K. Ramakrishnan Additional Public Prosecutor

JUDGMENT

(The case has been heard through video conference)

This Criminal Appeal has been filed against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed in S.C.No.227 of 2010 dated 17.05.2016 on the file of the learned District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Madurai.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the prosecutrix was a popular TV personality compering programmes in the private TV channels. During her visits to the Sai Baba Temple at Madurai, the accused befriended her and declared his love to her. In due course of time, they became lovers. On the strength of the bond of love, they had spent time together. The accused by misusing their relationship used to receive money whenever he needs the same, the prosecutrix had pledged her jewels and obtained money to pay the accused. Also, she had purchased a Two Wheeler, namely, Bajaj Pulsar (Black Colour) bearing Registration No.TN 58 U 2887 from the Bajaj Dealer at Madurai.

3.In the course of said relationship, the accused indulged in sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix at her residence. When her mother was not at home, she had sexual intercourse with the accused on the ground that the accused promised to marry her. When she became pregnant, she insisted the accused to marry her. The accused took her to his parents house. The accused hails from Namakkal, whereas, he was residing at Madurai. He brought his parents to his house at Madurai. The accused brought the prosecutrix to his house at Madurai and introduced her to his parents as his lover and he wanted to marry her. After exchanging pleasantries, when the prosecutrix was about to leave the house, the mother of the accused wanted to know the caste of the prosecutrix. She replied that she belonged to Thevar community.

4.The accused promised to visit the prosecutrix's house along with his parents seeking the prosecutrix's hands as his bride from the elders in the family of the prosecutrix, but did not turn up on the date he mentioned. On her query through mobile with the accused, the accused evaded a direct answer. Subsequently, on repeated query from the prosecutrix, he informed her that his parents are not amenable to the marriage as she is from a different community, Thevar and threatened her that he shall withdraw from their relationship. This forced her to give a complaint under Ex.P1 to the respondent police.

5.Based on complaint of the prosecutrix under Ex.P1, P.W-12, Geetha Ramani, Sub-Inspector Police, had registered the FIR under Ex.P3. The original FIR under Ex.P3 and the original complaint under Ex.P1, were sent to the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Madurai. The copies of the FIR and complaint were sent to the higher Officials of P.W-12, Geetha Ramani.

6.On receipt of the copy of the FIR under Ex.P3 and the complaint under Ex.P1, P.W-14, Nirmala, Inspector of Police, had proceeded with the investigation. She had examined the witnesses, P.W-2 to P.W-7. She had arrested the accused and forwarded the accused and the prosecutrix along with the police escorts to undergo medical examination. Accordingly, both were sent to medical examination and in this regard, a report was obtained under Ex.P2. P.W-11, Dr.Mahalakshmi, who examined the prosecut