Bail Slip

The Appellant/Accused Viz.,Seetharaman @ Mani aged about 26

years S/o.Srinivasan(in S.C.No.278/2007 dated 18/06/2019 on the

file of the Special Court for Cases under POCSO Act 2012/Mahila

Court, Chennai) was released on bail as per the order of this

Court

dated

18/07/2019

in

Crl.M.P.No.8949/2019

in

Crl.A.No.409/2019.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICIATURE AT MADRAS

Reserved on : 22.03.2021

Pronounced on: 01.07.2021

CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN

Criminal Appeal No.409 of 2019

Seetharaman @ Mani,

S/o.Srinivasan

..

Appellant /Accused

versus

The Inspector of Police,

N-4, Harbour Police Station,

Chennai - 600 081.

.. Respondent /Complainant

Crime No.1144 of 2015)

Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, to set aside the conviction and sentence

passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Cases

under POCSO Act, 2012 [Mahila Court], Chennai in S.C.No.278 of

2017 dated 18.06.2019.

For Appellant

:

Mr.S.Samuel Raja Pandian

for M/s.R.C.Paul Kanakaraj

For Respondent :

Mrs.T.P.Savitha

Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

J U D G M E N T

This Appeal has been filed against the conviction and

sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for

Cases under POCSO Act, 2012 [Mahila Court], Chennai in

S.C.No.278 of 2017 dated 18.06.2019.

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

2. Originally, the respondent Police has registered a

case against the appellant / accused in Crime No.1144 of 2015

for "girl missing" and subsequently, altered the case for the

offences under Section 366A of IPC and punishable under Section

6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012

[hereinafter called as "POCSO Act". After investigation, they

laid a charge sheet against the appellant before the learned

Sessions Judge, Special Court for Cases under POCSO Act, 2012

[Mahila Court], Chennai. Since the offence charged against the

appellant was against women, especially a minor child falls

under the POCSO Act, the learned Sessions Judge, had taken the

case on file in S.C.No.278 of 2017 and framed the charge against

the appellant.

3. After trial, on 11.07.2018, the learned Sessions

Judge, convicted the appellant for the offences under Section

366 of IPC and punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and

sentenced him to undergo 10 years Rigorous Imprisonment and to

pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to undergo 6 months

Rigorous Imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 6

of the POCSO Act and sentenced him to undergo 7 years Rigorous

Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to

undergo 6 months Rigorous Imprisonment for the offence under

Section 366 of IPC.

4. Against which, the appellant filed an appeal before

this Court in Crl.A.No.596 of 2018 and this Court, by a judgment

dated 19.12.2018, set aside the conviction and sentence passed

by the Special Court and remitted back to Trial Court liberty

was given to cross-examine the witnesses, within stipulated time

and based on that judgment, the matter was remitted back to the

Special Court.

5. After compliance of the directions of this Court,

once again, the Special Court pronounced the judgment, on

18.06.2019, stating that the appellant was not found guilty for

the offence punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and

thereby, acquitted him. However, the Special Court found guilty

of the appellant for the offence under Section 366 of IPC and

sentenced him to undergo 3 years Simple Imprisonment and to pay

a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to undergo 6 months Simple

Imprisonment. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the

appellant has preferred the present appeal before this Court.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant

would submit that, on 06.08.2015, the mother of the victim girl

has given a complaint for “girl missing” before the respondent

Police stating that t