IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED :14.09.2021

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN

CRL.A.NO.275 OF 2020

P.Chinnasamy,

S/o, Palaniappan

... Appellant/Accused

Versus

The State by

The Inspector of Police,

All Women Police Station East,

Coimbatore District.

... Respondent/Complainant

PRAYER:

Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2)of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, to call for the records relating to the

judgment dated 22.06.2016 made in Spl.C.C.No.7 of 2015 on the

file of the learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethi Mandram

(Mahila Court), Coimbatore and setaside the same.

For Appellant

: Mr.M.Saravana Kumar

For Respondent : Mr.S.Sugendran

Government Advocate, (Criminal Side)

JUDGMENT

This Criminal Appeal has been filed to call for the records

relating to the judgment dated 22.06.2016 passed in Spl.C.C.No.7

of 2015 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Magalir

Neethi Mandram (Mahila Court), Coimbatore and setaside the same.

2. The respondent police registered a case against the

appellant in Crime No.30 of 2014 for the offence under section 7

and 8 of POCSO Act. After investigation, laid a charge sheet

before the Special Court, since the offence is against woman

especially, the child under the definition of POCSO Act. The

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

learned Special Judge taken the charge sheet on file in

Spl.C.C.No.7 of 2015. After completing the formalities, framed

the charge against the appellant for the offence under section 5

(m) of POCSO Act, which is punishable under Section 6 of POCSO

Act. During trial, in order to substantiate the charge, on the

side of the prosecution, totally 12 witnesses were examined as

P.Ws.1 to 12. 15 documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P15.

Besides, four material objects were also exhibited as M.O.Nos.1

to 4. On completion of the examination of the prosecution

witnesses, incriminating circumstances culled out from the

evidence of the prosecution witnesses put before the accused by

questioning under section 313 Cr.P.C. He denied the same as

untrue and pleaded not guilty. 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 considering the materials placed before the

trial court, found the appellant guilty for the offence under

section 5(m) of POCSO Act, which is punishable under section 6

of POCSO Act and convicted the appellant and sentenced him to

undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of

Rs.1,000/- in default, to undergo three months simple

imprisonment. Challenging the said judgment of conviction and

sentence, the accused has filed the present appeal before this

Court.

4. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that

P.W.1 is the mother of the victim girl. The victim girl was

examined as P.W.2. She is aged about only six years and she

does not know anything. Due to previous enmity, the mother of

the victim girl tutored the victim girl and based on the same,

lodged a false complaint against the appellant. The respondent

police failed to conduct fair investigation and believed the

false case of the complainant, filed a charge sheet against the

appellant. Even P.Ws.1 to 4 are the neighbors of the

appellant. The appellant has vacant land and they used the

same as toilet and also used to take fire wood, the appellant

warned and prevented them from doing so. Therefore, they

foisted a false case against the appellant by setting up the

victim girl. Unfortunately, the prosecution also failed to

conduct proper investigation and laid a charge sheet against the

appellant and even the medical evidence did not support the case

of the prosecution, since there was no symptom of penetrative

sexual assault. Even injury sustained by the victim girl,

according to the doctor, there i