SELVAKUMAR Vs. STATE BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant is the sole accused in S.C. No. 51 of 2004 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge , Fast Track Court, Namakkal. He stands convicted for offences under Sections 366-A and 376 (1) of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to undergo R.I. for further 3 months for the offence under Section 366-A of IPC and to undergo R.I. for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to undergo R.I. for further 3 months for the offence under Section 376(1) of IPC by the judgment dated 18.11.2004. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the Appellant is, now, before this Court with this criminal appeal.

(2.) The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:

(3.) P.W.7 Doctor Vallinayagam examined the Appellant on 27.10.2000 and issued a certificate relating to his age under Ex.P.10. According to P.W.7, the Appellant was aged between 18 and 20 years at the time of occurrence. Under Ex.P.11 Certificate he has opined that the Appellant was capable of performing sex with a woman. P.W.5 Doctor Uma Maheswari examined P.W.2 on the request of the police on 01.11.2000. According to her, the age of P.W.2 would have been around 15 years. She had further found that the hymen was not intact. She further found that her vaginal cavity easily allowed two fingers to enter. From this , she opined under Ex.P.5 Certificate that P.W.2 would have been subjected to frequent sexual intercourse for about 8 months. P.W.8, the investigating officer collected the medical certificates and after completing the investigation, he filed charge sheet against the Appellant.