The State appealed against a conviction acquittal in a child sexual assault case. The High Court held that hostile testimony from the victim and mother, coupled with unexplained medical injuries in a father-daughter context, did not warrant overturning the acquittal. The appeal was dismissed.
Criminal Appeal against acquittal stands dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Crl.A.No.499 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 14.03.2023
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Crl.A.No.499 of 2016
State represented by: The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras - 600 104. [AWPS., Perambalur, Crime No.18 of 2014]
... Appellant
Versus
M.Rajagopal ... Respondent
Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 378 of The Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 to set aside the judgment of acquittal passed in S.C.No.35 of 2014, dated 02.06.2015 by the learned Principal District Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Perambalur and convict the respondent / accused as charged.
For Appellant : Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
For Respondent : M/s.D.Chandraleka Legal Aid Counsel
1/7
Crl.A.No.499 of 2016
JUDGMENT
The State is on an appeal aggrieved by the judgment of the Mahila Court, Perambalur in S.C.No.35 of 2014, thereby, acquitting the respondent / accused of the charges under Section 5(n) r/w 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as ' POCSO Act ') and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Woman Act, 1998 (hereinafter referred to as ' TNPHW Act ').
Crl.A.No.499 of 2016
05.07.2014, she deposed that her father has an extra-marital affair and since he had two wives, he has always been torturing her mother. On the fateful day, in an inebriated condition, he attacked her on the head and caused an injury and also dragged her by pulling the dress and her dress was torn. However, when the victim child as well as her mother were examined before the Trial Court as P.Ws.1 and 5 , they deposed that the victim child sustained injuries while playing Kabaddi in the school. The Trial Court, considering the said evidence on record, came to a conclusion that except the official witness of the Child Welfare Committee, when each and every witness has turned hostile, there is no enough material to bring home the guilt of the accused and acquitted the accused, against which, this Criminal Appeal is laid before this Court.
Crl.A.No.499 of 2016
victim, wherein, the victim had narrated about the incident. The version is also corroborated by the medical evidence in the form of a bite mark which was found on the left thigh of the child. Otherwise, medical evidence does not corroborate the version of P.W.1 that the child sustained injuries during play in the school. He would submit that even though the victim child did not support the case of the prosecution, the evidence of P.W.1 , corroborated with Ex.P-5 , medical examination report, itself would prove if not penetrative sexual assault atleast sexual assault punishable under Sections 10, 11 of POCSO Act and therefore, the Trial Court erred in acquitting the respondent / accused.
respondent / accused would submit that there cannot be any conclusion on the sole basis of the bite mark which is found in the medical report. A bite mark can also happen during the children playing Kabaddi. Therefore, when the offence under the POCSO Act being serious in nature, there must be very categorical and clear evidence so as to convict the accused and when the Trial Court, after appreciating the entire evidence on record, by exercising its jurisdiction, had granted the benefit of doubt to the respondent / accused, the same cannot be upturned in this appeal against acquittal.
4/7
Crl.A.No.499 of 2016
14.03.2023
5/7
Crl.A.No.499 of 2016
Index : no Speaking order Neutral Citation : no grs
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY. J., grs
To
Crl.A.No.499 of 2016
Crl.A.No.499 of 2016
14.03.2023
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeal should be allowed given that the victim and her mother turned hostile and corroborating medical evidence regarding the bite mark was insufficient.
6 provisions across 3 enactments
State
M.Rajagopal
D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
