IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 18.11.2025 Coram:

The Honourable Mrs.Justice T.V.THAMILSELVI Crl.A.No.1433 of 2025 Karthik ...Appellant Versus The State Rep. by its The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station – Ooty Town, Nilgiris.

(Crime No.10 of 2021)

...Respondent This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 415(2) of BNSS praying to set aside the conviction and sentence against the appellant in Spl.C.C.No.35 of 2022 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethimandram (FTMC), Udhagamandalam, Nilgiris dated 21.11.2023 and allow this appeal.

For Appellant : Mr.P.Thinesh For Respondent : Mr.V.Meganathan Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

JUDGMENT

This Criminal Appeal has been preferred by the Appellant/Accused praying to set aside the Judgment dated 21.11.2023 in Spl.C.C.No.35 of 2022 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethimandram (FTMC), Udhagamandalam, Nilgiris.

2. The brief facts of the case are that one Mr.Kariyappan is residing at Ammanadu Village along with her two daughters. His wife had already passed away. His younger daughter (victim girl) studied upto 8^th Standard in Ullathy Middle School and thereafter, she discontinued her studies. The Appellant/Accused was also residing in the same village. Since the victim girl’s father was unable to look after his younger daughter (victim girl), the victim girl was admitted in Annai Sathya Child Welfare Home by her father. On 28.07.2021, when the victim girl’s father went to home to see his younger daughter (victim girl), the victim girl told her father that she was in love with the Appellant/Accused and on 18.06.2021, Appellant/Accused took her to his house and had sexual intercourse with her. Upon hearing the same, the victim girl’s father had lodged a complaint to the Respondent Police stating that Appellant/Accused had committed penetrative sexual assault upon her younger daughter (victim girl) aged about 14 years. Based on the complaint given by the victim girl’s father, the Respondent Police had registered a case in Crime No.10 of 2021 against the Appellant/Accused under Section 5(1) r/w. 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. The Investigating Officer took up the said case for investigation and examined the victim girl and her father. Thereafter, on 28.07.2021, the Investigating Officer arrested the Appellant/Accused and obtained the Confession Statement of Appellant/Accused in the presence of witnesses and remanded the Appellant/Accused. After receiving the necessary Medical Certificate from Doctor and Age Certificate from the School where the victim girl studied, the Investigating Officer had altered the charge framed against the Appellant/Accused from Section 5(1) r/w. 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 to Sections 366 & 342 of IPC and Section 5(1) r/w. 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. Then, the Investigating Officer had filed the Charge Sheet against the Appellant/Accused before the Court of Sessions Judge of Magalir Neethimandram (FTMC), Udhagamandalam, The Nilgiris.

3. Before the Trial Court, on the side of prosecution, 10 witnesses were examined as P.W.1 to P.W.10 and 17 documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P17. On the side of Appellant/Accused, no witnesses were examined as witnesses and no documents were marked as exhibits.

4. On appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, the Trial Court had held that the prosecution is successful in proving the guilt of the Appellant/Accused for having committed the offence under Sections 366 & 342 of IPC and Section 5(1) r/w. 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. Therefore, the Trial Court vide Judgment dated 21.11.2023 in Spl.C.C.No.35 of 2022, convicted the Appellant/Accused under Section 235(ii) of Cr.P.C and sentenced him as follows:

Aggrieved by the said judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court, Appellant/Accused has preferred the present Criminal Appeal before this Court.

5. The learned counsel for Appellant/Accused submitted that the Appellant/Accused and the victim girl had loved each other. At th