IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 05.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR

G.Thirumavalavan ….. Appellant/Accused

Vs

State represented by

The Inspector of Police, Kunnam Police Station,

Perambalur District. ….. Respondent/Complainant

Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, praying to call for the records and to set aside the judgment and sentence dated 06.01.2018 imposed in S.C.No.14 of 2011 on the file of the Mahila Court,

Perambalur.

For Appellant : M/s.A.Veeramarthini

Legal Aid Counsel

For Respondent : Mr.S.Udayakumar

Government Advocate (Crl.side)

Assisted by Harshana.T.

JUDGMENT

The Appellant/Accused in S.C.No.14 of 2011 was convicted by the Trial

Court by Judgment dated 06.01.2018 for the offence under Section 376 of IPC

and sentenced him to undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo three years simple imprisonment.

Aggrieved against the said conviction, the appellant/accused filed this appeal.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the P.W.3, the defacto-

complainant, is the victim in this case. On 20.06.1998, when the victim went to take bath near the Kattaiyankulam well and was returning home, the appellant/accused, who was following her for about six months, on the promise of marrying her, was standing near a bush. At that time, the appellant suddenly caught and pulled the victim, forcibly dragged her to a bush, removed her clothes, tore her blouse and committed rape. After the occurrence, the victim returned home in a distressed condition and informed to her parents about the incident. Thereafter, parents of the victim went to the house of the appellant and questioned his parents. The appellant not available. An attempt was made to convene a village panchayat, but appellant absconded and panchayat could not be done. Subsequently, on 22.06.1998, a complaint was lodged.

3. P.W.13, the Head Constable, received the complaint, which is marked as Ex.P1 and registered a case in Crime No.275 of 1998 for the offence under Section 376 of IPC. The FIR marked as Ex.P5 At the relevant point of time, PW.10 was the Inspector of Police in charge. On receipt of the information and the complaint, he visited the scene of occurrence in presence of P.W.11 and another witness, prepared the Observation Mahazar and Rough Sketch and referred the victim for medical examination. P.W.9, the Doctor, examined the victim on 23.06.1998 and opined that the hymen was not intact and that there was possibility of sexual intercourse. The medical report marked as Ex.P4.

4. P.W.1 brother of the victim and P.W.4 mother of the victim. P.W.12 seen the victim near the Kuttaiyankulam well crying, who enquired the victim and was informed about the rape committed. Thereafter, appellant absconded and went abroad and not available during investigation. In the meanwhile, the Investigating Officer examined the other witnesses and collected documents. The appellant obtained anticipatory bail on 21.07.2005, however, he did not report thereafter. Consequently, a Non-Bailable Warrant was issued. The appellant was later arrested and produced before the Court. P.W.8 examined the appellant on 11.08.2005 and issued potency certificate, which are marked as Ex.P2 and Ex.P3. After completion of the investigation, final report filed against the appellant.

5. During trial, on the side of the prosecution, PW1 to PW14 examined and Exs.P1 to P8 marked. 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.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that P.W.3, the victim, admitted that the appellant was in love with her for about six months and also promised to marry her. When the parents and family members of the victim demanded immediate marriage, the same was refused by the appellant and his family. Therefore, a complaint was lodged alleging that forcible rape co