LAWS(MAD)-2022-10-133

JAGANATHAN (A) JAGAN Vs. STATE

Decided On October 14, 2022
Jaganathan (A) Jagan Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal is directed as against the judgment passed in CC.No.7 of 2017 dtd. 15/3/2018 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahalir Neethimandram (Mahila Court), Coimbatore, thereby convicted the appellant for the offence under Ss. 4 and 6 of Protection of Chidren from Sexual Offences( POCSO) Act, 2012

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that the victim was aged about 16 years. The accused and the minor victim had love affair. While being so, on 30/11/2011, when the victim was alone in the house, the accused went to her house on her birthday and presented a gift. He deceitfully made her believe that he will marry her, intentionally induced her and forcefully had penetrative sexual assault on her and continued the same and for nearly one year. Hence, the act of the accused falls under the definition of rape of a minor girl. Based on the information received from the Ramvikram Hospital, Sowripalayam, Coimbatore, the Inspector of Police, D3, Podanur Police Station, Coimbatore registered FIR in crime No.675 of 2013 for the offence under Sec. 417 of IPC and Sec. 4 of Tamilnadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act against the accused. Thereafter, the respondent had taken up the investigation of the complaint and after examination of all the witnesses, arrested the accused and remanded to judicial custody on 6/6/2013. After completion of investigation, final report was filed for the offences under Ss. 417 of IPC and 5(L) and 6 of POCSO Act against the accused. The trial court had taken cognizance for the offence under Sec. 417 of IPC and Ss. 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.

(3.) In order to prove the case, prosecution had examined PW1 to PW16 and marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P19. On the side of the accused, no one was examined and no documents were marked. On perusal of the oral and material evidence, the trial court found the appellant guilty for the offence under Ss. 4 and 6 of POCSO Act and sentenced him to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000.00, in default to undergo two months simple imprisonment. That apart, the trial court ordered compensation to the tune of Rs.1,00,000.00 in favour of the victim, in default to undergo two years rigorous imprisonment. Aggrieved by the same, the present criminal appeal has been filed.