A penetrative sexual assault under the POCSO Act is established through the corroborative evidence of medical reports, ocular witnesses, and the testimony of a child victim, even where the child may have minor inconsistencies in narrative, provided the overall material proves the offence beyond reasonable doubt.

J U D G M E N T

L.VICTORIA GOWRI , J. ,

This criminal appeal is filed against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Special Court for trial of cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, that is, the learned Judge, Mahalir Neethi Mandram (Fast Track Mahila Court) at Ramanathapuram in Special S.C. No.5 of 2018 dated 20.12.2019. By the above judgment, the learned Trial court had convicted the appellant and sentenced him as detailed below:

2. Penal Provision:

Section 5(i)(m) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act. Sentence of Imprisonment: Life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default to undergo six months’ rigorous imprisonment. The sentences shall run concurrently.

3. Further, the learned Trial Court has recommended payment of compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) from the State Government’s Victim Compensation Fund by depositing the same in a fixed deposit in any nationalised bank for a period of three years. The mother of the victim child is directed to receive the interest on the same till the child attains the age of majority, towards meeting the expenditure relating to the minor girl’s education and medical needs.

Case of the Prosecution in Brief:

4. The respondent/complainant registered a case against the appellant for alleged offences under Section 5(i)(m) read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and under Section 324 IPC on the basis of information given by one Vembukani, wife of Munusamy, who is the de facto complainant and was examined as PW1, following which a First Information Report came to be registered in Crime No.17 of 2017 on 04.04.2017.

5. The case of the prosecution is that on 03.04.2017, when the de facto complainant had gone out for her daily wage job after sending her two children to school after feeding them at 8.00 a.m., she was said to have been called by one Vasuki, wife of Kasi, who was examined as PW2, informing her that her daughter, that is, the victim girl who was examined as PW10, had got injured on her head as she was said to have fallen down, and instructed her to come to the Government Hospital, Mudhukulathur. There, the de facto complainant was said to have found the victim girl (PW10) with an injury on the backside of her head and in the vagina. Owing to the injury on the backside of the head and vagina, the de facto complainant was advised to take the victim girl to the Government Hospital at Ramanathapuram.

6. At that time, it was revealed to the de facto complainant by Vasuki, wife of Kasi (PW2), and her husband Kasi Lingam, who was listed as LW2, that they had peeped into the house of the de facto complainant on hearing a sound from the backyard bathing space of the de facto complainant’s house, where they identified the appellant inserting his fingers into the sexual organ/vagina of the victim girl, while forcibly shutting and compressing her mouth using his other hand, and that he had taken to his heels by pushing the victim girl on the washing stone block. On receipt of the said information, the de facto complainant rushed with the victim girl to the Government Hospital, Ramanathapuram, from where she was further taken to the Medical Officer of Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai.

7. The case was investigated, and a final report was filed before the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Ramanathapuram, as Final Report in FR No.60 o