Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.ANAND VENKATESH, K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, JJ
Muthupandi – Appellant
Versus
The Inspector of Police, Pudukkottai All Women Police Station, Pudukkottai District – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. prosecution case and trial proceedings under pocso. (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 2. appellant's defence of prior dispute. (Para 12 , 13 , 21) |
| 3. victim evidence establishes foundational facts triggering presumptions. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 20) |
| 4. child victim testimony reliable; no corroboration needed. (Para 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 5. appeal dismissed; trial judgment affirmed. (Para 25) |
The sole accused has assailed the judgment passed in Special S.C.No. 39 of 2021, dated 01.11.2022, on the file of the Mahila Court, Pudukottai, wherein the appellant was convicted for offence under Section 6 (1) of the POCSO (Amendment) Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as “POCSO Act” for brevity) and was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay the fine of Rs.1,50,000/- and in default to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment.
2. The case of the prosecution is that PW1, who is the mother of the victim girl/PW2, is a coolie and her husband is a driver and they had three children and the victim girl is the eldest daughter. She was born on 12.09.2008. The accused person is known to the family of the victim girl, since he was the uncle (rpjj; gg; h). The furthe
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
