RAVI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal has been filed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dtd. 4/1/2020 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahalir Neethimandram (Fast Track Mahila Court) Tiruppur in Spl.S.C.No.14 of 2017.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that the victim, who was aged about 17 years, was working as an Assistant Tailor at Anitha stitching centre. The accused/appellant was also working in the same stitching centre. On 5/5/2014, the victim went to the stitching centre for attending the work at about 8.30 a.m the victim stated to her parents that she was not doing well and that she is going to her house. At the same time, the accused also went out from the stitching centre. Thereafter, the accused kidnapped the minor victim girl from the lawful guardians from Tiruppur to Amurdhahalli, Bangalore in train and forcefully married her and both were residing in a rented house at Bangalore near the house of P.W.5 one Nagamani. Both the accused and the victim resided at Bangalore for about 76 days i.e. from 5/5/2014 to 19/7/2014 and at that time the accused forcefully had sexual intercourse with the minor victim several times. Further, the accused is a non-member of the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes Community and the victim girl belongs to Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes Community, thereby, the offence committed by the appellant falls under Ss. 363, 344 IPC and Ss. 3 r/w 4 and 5(l) r/w 6 of 'The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012' [hereinafter referred to as 'POCSO Act' for the sake of convenience] and Ss. 3(1)(r)(w)(i) r/w 3(2)(Va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, [ hereinafter referred to as 'SC/ST Act'].

(3.) On the complaint given by the de-facto complainant/P.W.1, the respondent/Police registered a case in Crime No.624 of 2014 as 'girl missing'. After investigation, the respondent/Police filed alteration reports before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Tiruppur against the appellant for the offences under Sec. girl missing @ 366(A) IPC @ 3(1)(r)(w)(i) and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act and Ss. 366-A and 376 IPC. Thereafter, the respondent/Police laid a charge sheet before the learned Magalir Neethimandram (Fast Track Mahila Court), Tiruppur for the offences under Ss. 366 and 344 IPC and Sec. 5(l) which is punishable under Sec. 6 of POCSO Act and Ss. 3(1)(r)(w)(i) and 3(2)(Va) of SC/ST Act and the same was taken on file in Spl.S.C.No.14 of 2017. When questioned, the accused denied the allegation. However, based on the materials, the trial Court framed the aforementioned charges against the appellant.