SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 76261

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P. Velmurugan, R. Poornima, JJ
... – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu – Respondent
Crl.A(MD)No.1221 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: B.Sekar
For the Respondents: B. Nambi Selvan

A step-father committing penetrative sexual assault on a step-daughter constitutes an 'aggravated penetrative sexual assault' under Section 5(n) and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, and the victim's consistent testimony, corroborated by medical and school documentation, is sufficient to sustain a conviction even if minor procedural contradictions exist.

Headnote:(A) Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Section 5(l), 5(n) and 6 - Aggravated penetrative sexual assault - Appellant is the step father - Victim child is aged below 18 years - Proof of age - School records are reliable indicators of age - Penetrative sexual assault by family member/step father constitutes aggravated offence - Conviction upheld. (Paras 17, 18, 20)

(B) Appellate Jurisdiction - Re-appreciation of evidence - Appellate court acts as a fact-finding authority - Independent evaluation found no material contradictions - Prosecution evidence cogent and consistent - Confession/statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C and medical evidence sufficient to prove guilt. (Paras 21, 22)

Facts of the case:
The appellant, who was the step father of the victim (a minor girl), was accused of committing repeated acts of sexual intercourse with her. The prosecution based its charges on the victim's testimony, medical reports (confirming hymen non-intactness), and the mother's complaint. The trial court convicted the accused under the POCSO Act and sentenced him to life imprisonment, which the appellant challenged, citing contradictions in witness statements and issues with age proof.

Findings of Court:
Evidence from the victim, the mother, and expert medical reports proved the crime beyond reasonable doubt. The documents from the school established the victim was a child at the time of the offense. The court affirmed the conviction as the appellant failed to provide contrary evidence.

Issues: Whether the prosecution proved the age of the victim, whether the penetrative sexual assault was established, and whether the conviction under the POCSO Act is sustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: When evidence of the victim is consistent and corroborated by medical exams and documentary proof regarding age, it establishes the guilt of the accused. The act of a step father committing sexual assault on his step child falls squarely under the aggravated form of sexual assault defined in the Act.

Result: Appeal dismissed; trial court judgment confirmed.

Table of Content
1. procedural background and framing of charges under pocso act. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
2. summary of rival contentions regarding evidence and age proof. (Para 9 , 10 , 11)
3. evaluation of medical reports and victim testimony establishing age and commission of offense. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)
4. appellate reassessment of guilt and confirmation of trial court conviction. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24)

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was made by the Hon'ble P.VELMURUGAN J.

This criminal appeal is filed against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Principal Special Court for exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Thanjavur, in Special SC No.04 of 2022, dated 08/05/2025 and consequently to acquit the appellant.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the victim child is aged about 12 years at the time of the occurrence and she was studying 8th Standard. The de-facto complainant is the mother of the victim child. The accused is the step father of the victim chid. The first husband of the de- facto complainant fell in a well and passed away 10 years back. When the de-facto complainant was working in Coimbatore, relationship developed between herself and the accused and thereafter, she lived with the accused along with her son and the victim child, who were born through the deceased first husband. They were working in the brick-kiln. When there was no work in the brick-kiln, the accused went to Karur and doing welding work. In the meantime, on 03/08/2021 at 12.00 midnight, the accused touched the breasts of the victim child, inserted his genital into her genital and had forcible sexual intercourse with her. When the victim child questioned the accused, he has stated to her that she is not born to him and she is his wife and threatened her stating that if she disclosed the occurrence to anybody, he would leave them in lurch. Again on 15/08/2021, on the independence day at about 05.00 am, he lifted her nighty, touched her breasts and forcibly had sexual intercourse with her.

3.Based on the complaint (Ex.P1) given by the mother of the victim child, the respondent Police registered a case in Crime No.13 of 2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 4(2), 5(l) and 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, (herein-after referred as to 'POCSO Act) against the accused. After completing the investigation, the respondent Police laid a charge sheet before the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Thanjavur, under Sections 5(m), 5(n), 5(l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act and the same was taken on file in Special SC No.04 of 2022.

4.After completing the formalities under Section 207 Cr.P.C., since there was a prima facie material to frame charges against the accused, the learned Sessions Judge framed charges for the offences punishable under Section 6 r/w 5(l), (n) of POCSO Act and Section 506(i) IPC.

5.After framing charges, during trial, on the side of the prosecution, in order to substantiate the charges, totally 18 witnesses were examined as PW1 to PW18 and 14 documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P14.

6.After completing the examination of the prosecution side witnesses, when the accused was questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in respect of the incriminating circumstances appearing against him based on the evidence adduced by the prosecution, he denied the same as false. On the side of the defence, no oral and documentary evidence was adduced.

7.After completing the trial and upon hearing the arguments advanced on either side and also considering the oral and documentary evidence adduced, the learned Trial Judge found the guilty, who is appellant herein, for the offences under Section 6 r/w 5(l), 5(n) of POCSO Act and 506(i) IPC, convicted him thereunder and sentenced him to undergo Life Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.15,000/-, in default to undergo 6 months of Simple Imprisonment for the offence under Section 6

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top