The conviction for attempt to sexually assault a minor was upheld based on credible testimonies, emphasizing the credibility of child witnesses and the reverse burden of proof under the POCSO Act.

JUDGMENT :

K. Murali Shankar, J.

The Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction made in Spl.S.C.No.4 of 2016 dated 06.07.2018 on the file of the Mahila Court, Madurai.

2. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Tallakulam, Madurai City laid a charge sheet against the appellant / sole accused (hereinafter referred as 'accused') alleging that the defacto complainant was working as a beautician trainer in Industrial Training Institute (ITI), Pudhur, Madurai and her husband was working as a Head Constable in Dog Squad attached to Armed Reserve, Madurai, that the defacto complainant's daughter (victim girl) was studying 7^th standard in Kendriya Vidyalaya, Madurai, that the victim girl, after attending school, used to go to tuition centre situated just opposite to her school, that the defacto complainant, after completing her work, used to pick up the victim girl, that there was a family function in the defacto complainant's relative's home on 07.10.2015 and her husband was helping their relatives, that since the victim girl was also to attend the function, her father requested his friend to pick up his daughter from the school and drop her in their house and accordingly, the defacto complainant's husband's friend picked up the victim girl and dropped her in front of their house at about 03.00 p.m., that when the victim girl was climbing stairs, the accused, who was residing in the ground floor, was found sitting on motor tank, that the victim girl went to their first floor house and was opening the door and at that time, the accused, who came behind, dragged her hands and attempted to hug her and the victim girl pushed him and entered into their house and locked inside and at that time, the accused told her that her aunt was not in the home and her father would come home soon and directed the victim girl to come to his house, that when the victim girl viewed through her window found that the accused was sitting on motor tank and fearing that he would return, she decided to go to upstairs and then to move to nearby block and at that time, she heard a vehicle sound and on seeing that her mother returned, she got down crying and informed the incident to her mother and that thereby the accused had committed the offences under Sections 7 and 8 of the Protection of Child From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred as 'POCSO Act').

3. After the receipt of the final report, the case was taken on file in Spl.S.C.No.4 of 2016 on the file of Mahila Court, Madurai. After appearance of the accused, copies of records were furnished under Section 207 Cr.P.C. on free of costs. The learned Sessions Judge, on perusal of records and on hearing both the sides, being satisfied that there existed a prima facie case against the accused, framed charge under Section 8 of the POCSO Act and the same was read over and explained to him and on being questioned, the accused denied the charge and pleaded not guilty.

4. The prosecution, to prove its case, examined 15 witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.15 and exhibited 5 documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.5.

5. The case of the prosecution emerging from the evidence adduced by the prosecution in brief as follows;

(a) P.W.1 (defacto complainant) is the wife of P.W.4 and P.W.6 (victim girl) is their daughter. P.W.4 was working as a Head Constable in Dog Squad attached to Armed Reserve, Madurai. P.W.1 was working as a beautician trainer in ITI, Pudhur, Madurai. P.W.6 (victim girl) was studying 7^th standard in Kendriya Vidyalaya and she was aged 12 years. Their son was studyi