IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 02-01-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR

CRL A No. 105 of 2022

AND

CRL MP NO. 1388 OF 2022

Manikandan @ Shanmugam

S/o. Gurusamy, Valliyammal -1 Street,

Anna Theatre Back Side,

Periyavalasu Nall Road, Erode.

Appellant/Accused

Vs

State Rep by

The Inspector of Police,

Erode All Women Police Station,

Erode.

(Crime No.11/2019).

Respondent(s)

CRL MP No. 1388 of 2022

1. Manikandan @ Shanmugam

S/o. Gurusamy, Valliyammal -1 Street, Anna Theatre Back Side, Periyavalasu

Nall Road, Erode.

Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. State Rep By

Inspector Of Police, Erode All

Women Police Station, Erode. Cr.No.

11/2019.

Respondent(s)

PRAYER : Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. praying to set aside the judgment of conviction passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethimandram (Fast Track Mahila Court), Erode in Spl.S.C.No.42 of 2019 on 02.08.2021, acquit the appellant.

For Appellant : Mr.M.Vignesh For Respondent : Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

Assisted by Ms.Harshana, T.

J U D G M E N T

The appellant/accused in Spl.S.C.No.42 of 2019 was convicted by the trial Court by the judgment dated 02.08.2021 for the offences under Sections 9(n) r/w 10 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short ‘POCSO Act’) and sentenced to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to undergo three months simple imprisonment. Aggrieved against the said conviction, the appellant/accused filed this appeal.

2. The gist of the case is that PW1/mother of the victim lodged a complaint stating that her daughter is 11½ years old and her date of birth is 29.11.2008. She married one Shanmugam, who died due to blood cancer when her daughter/victim was 1½ years old and thereafter the appellant and PW1 were living as husband and wife. The victim was studying 5^th standard, the de facto complainant used to go for work at 8.00 a.m. and return at 8.00 p.m. The victim used to attend school daily at 8.45 a.m., return by 4.10 p.m., and thereafter attend tuition at 6.00 p.m. The appellant used to go for work in the morning and come back by 3.00 p.m. This being so, one week prior to 29.03.2019, the victim was sexually assaulted by the appellant. Initially, the assaults occurred on Sunday and thereafter on Monday and Wednesday. Though the victim not informed her mother immediately, unable to bear the pain and suffering, she later disclosed the same to her mother. When the appellant was questioned about the same, he denied. Thereafter the victim was taken to the police station by the de facto complainant and a complaint was lodged. PW8/Investigating Officer, received the complaint, register an F.I.R. Thereafter the victim was sent for medical examination. PW6/Doctor examined the victim at about 10.00 a.m. and issued Accident Register/Ex.P8. Thereafter referred for further examination of the victim. PW5/Doctor examined the victim and the victim informed about she being sexually assaulted by the appellant on several days. PW5 issued Medical Report/Ex.P6 and Final Opinion/Ex.P7. PW8 visited the scene of occurrence, prepared observation mahazar, rough sketch in presence of witnesses, examined victims, victim’s mother and others. The accused was arrested on the same day at 9.30 a.m. On his confession, chappatti roller/MO1 recovered. The accused was produced for medical examination. PW7 examined the accused, issued Potency Certificate/Ex.P11. The victim was produced before the Magistrate on 03.04.2019 and a statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C./Ex.P2 recorded. On collection of materials and medical records charge sheet filed in this case.

3.During trial, on the side of the prosecution, PW1 to PW8 examined, Exs.P1 to P20 marked and M.O.1 produced. On the side of the defence, no witnesses examined and no documents marked. On conclusion of trial, the trial Court convicted the appellant as stated above.

4.The contention of the learned counsel for appellant is that in this case PW1/de fa