R. GOMATHI Vs. JEEVA @ JEEVANANDAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioner is the defacto complainant and she has come forward with this Criminal Revision Petition aggrieved by the order of acquittal passed by the court below, acquitting the accused/first respondent herein.

(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, she knew the first respondent/accused even when she was studying 7th standard inasmuch he is the friend of her counsin brother namely Murali and both the petitioner and the accused were moving closely and their association was also known to the family of the petitioner. During the relevant time, the petitioner was studying Teacher Education in Pondicherry and at that time, the petitioner was called upon by the accused to come to the Perumal temple around 5.00 pm. Accordingly, the petitioner went to perumal temple by bus, where she was picked up by the accused in his motor bike. When the petitoiner questioned as to where he is taking her, he refused to say anything. The petitioner was taken to an isolated place surrounded by bushes in Nathampettai Village by stating that they can sit there and relax for some time. After reaching the said place, the accused removed her thupatta, hugged and kissed her several times. Thereafter, he also removed her churidhar and stripped her naked. When the petitioner was asked to lie down, she refused and on such refusal the accused slapped her. The accused thereafter inserted the condomn in his penis and when this was questioned, he replied that it will prevent the child birth and that she can continue her studies without any hindrance. The accused thereafter penetrated his penis into her private parts and indulged in sexual intercourse. The petitioner was thereafter compelled to suck her penis and when this was refused by her, he threatened her by saying that unless she does so, she will not be able to leave that place. Under such intimidation, the petitioner sucked his penis and removed the condom by her mouth. Thereafter, the accused asked the petitioner to wear the clothes and left her in the house in his motor bike. According to the petitioner, this incident was not revealed by her to any one fearing intimidation as the accused warned her not to disclose this to any one, failing which she and her mother will be done to death. Further, during the relevant time, her examinations were on the pipeline and therefore also, she did not immediately disclose the incident to her mother. Thereafter, she disclosed the entire incident to her mother and given the complaint dated 18.06.2008, Ex.P1 before the second respondent/police. On the basis of such complaint, the Crime No. 12 of 2008 came to be registered against the accused for the offences punishable under Section 376, 417 read with 506 (ii) IPC. After investigation, the second respondent laid the charge sheet before the court below and it was taken on file in S.C. No.114 of 2009.

(3.) ON the above submission, I heard the learned Government Advocate appearing for the second respondent/State and perused the materials on record.