The prosecution failed to prove charges beyond reasonable doubt due to significant delays and lack of corroborative evidence, resulting in the appellant's acquittal.

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Crl.A.No.275 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.No.13675 of 2025 Jagan ... Appellant Vs.

State represented by the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Thudiyalur, Coimbatore District.

(Crime No.20 of 2016) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 415 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying to allow the above criminal appeal by calling for the records and set aside the judgment dated 04.01.2025 passed in Spl.C.C.No.13 of 2019 on the file of the Principal Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Coimbatore.

For Appellant : Mr.S.Sriram for Mr.K.Govi Ganesan For Respondent : Mr.S.Raja Kumar, Additional Public Prosecutor

JUDGMENT

This Criminal Appeal has been preferred as against the Judgment dated 04.01.2025 passed in Spl.C.C.No.13 of 2019 on the file of the Principal Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Coimbatore, thereby convicted the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 10 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 , Section 506 (i) of IPC and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 .

2. The case of the prosecution is that the victim girl, while studying in the 8^th Standard, was staying in Mercy Shelter, which was run by the first accused. The second accused was employed as a cook in the same shelter. While being so, one year prior to 22.04.2016, both the accused engaged in sexual intercourse inside the kitchen, office room and dishwashing area of the shelter during night time, once every two days. They had forced the victim girl to watch them while they were having sexual intercourse. They also threatened the victim girl not to disclose the same to anybody.

3. Based on the complaint, the respondent registered a FIR in Crime No.20 of 2016 for the offences punishable under Sections 11(i) read with 12 of POCSO Act, Section 506 (i) of IPC and Section 75 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 . After completion of the investigation, the respondent filed a final report and the same has been taken cognizance in Spl.C.C.No.13 of 2019 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Principal Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Coimbatore.

4. On the side of the prosecution, P.W.1 to P.W.12 were examined and Exs.P1 to P13 were marked. On the side of the accused, no witnesses were examined and no documents were marked. On perusal of the oral and documentary evidence, the Trial Court found the appellant guilty of the offence under Section 10 of POCSO Act and sentenced him to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default of payment of fine, to undergo one year of simple imprisonment. Further, he was convicted for the offence under Section 12 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo two years simple imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- in default of which to undergo three months of simple imprisonment. He was also convicted for the offence under Section 506 (i) of IPC and sentenced to undergo two years rigorous imprisonment. Additionally, he was convicted for the offence under Section 75 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and sentenced to undergo two years of rigorous imprisonment. Aggrieved by the same, the present Criminal Appeal has been filed.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that the prosecution failed to prove any of the charges as alleged against the appellant. The appellant is arrayed as A1. There were four complaints with difference version. It creates doubt and susp