LAWS(MAD)-2026-1-216

VELAYUTHAM Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

Decided On January 09, 2026
VELAYUTHAM Appellant
V/S
STATE OF TAMIL NADU Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the sole accused, challenging the conviction and sentence imposed upon him for the offence under Sec. 323 of the IPC and Ss. 10 and 12 of the POCSO Act, 2012, vide judgment dtd. 23/2/2023 in Spl.SC.No.5 of 2021, on the file of the learned Special Judge (Under the POCSO Act 2012) Principal Sessions Judge, Puducherry.

(2.) (i) The case of the prosecution is that the appellant is the father of the victim girl; that a few years prior to 15/4/2020, the appellant had sexually assaulted the victim girl, who was aged 8 to 9 years at the time of occurrence and aged 13 years at the time of filing of the complaint; that he had inappropriately touched the private part of the victim girl and made the victim girl touch his penis on several occasions; that after the victim girl attained puberty, the appellant made the victim girl to read pornographic books; that the appellant on one occasion peeped into the bedroom of the victim girl, while she was changing her dress after a bath; and thus, committed the offence under Ss. 11(i) and 12 of POCSO Act, 2012.

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the complaint lodged by PW1 (mother of the victim), with whom he had matrimonial differences, is attended with malafides; that the complaint was lodged only after the appellant had filed a petition for divorce; that prior to filing of the complaint, PW1 had filed a suit in OS No.55 of 2020 for injunction before the Family Court (Pondicherry); that in the said suit there is no reference to any of the alleged sexual assaults except for vaguely referring to the alleged act of the appellant peeping in the victim's bedroom; that no independent witness has been examined to prove the alleged occurrences; that only the victim girl, her mother and her grand mother have been examined; that the victim was not subjected to any medical examination; and that in the light of the above facts, the evidence of the witnesses do not inspire confidence and hence, prayed for acquittal.