GOPI @ GOPINATH Vs. THE STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, LAW AND ORDER, F-2, EGMORE POLICE STATION, CHENNAI - 8

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant/Accused has preferred the instant Criminal Appeal before this Court (As an aggrieved person) as against the Judgment dated 25.08.2015 in S.C. No. 253 of 2014 passed by the Learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Chennai.

(2.) The Learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Chennai while passing the Impugned Judgment in S.C. No. 253 of 2014 on 25.08.2015 at Paragraph No.21 had observed that 'The prosecution witnesses P.W.1 to P.W.6 in their evidence had deposed that at about 9.45 a.m. they heard the noise/sound at the lift and after getting down from the lift when they came down, young girl came out from the lift and at that time, the Accused (Appellant) came out from lift and within a short time when the young girl's mother came out of the lift along with the said girl and stated that the elderly person wrongly behaved with her daughter and she gave a police complaint. Thereafter, when P.W.1, P.W.2 and P.W.4 after P.W.4 (victim girl) informed about the incident, P.W.1, informed the Ward Doctor about the happening of occurrence and immediately he phoned up to the Police. Thereafter, all the witnesses had stated immediately the police came to the hospital and they caused enquiry with them and after knowing the arrival time of the Accused went near the maternity hospital gate and the Accused was caught. Thereafter, he was brought to the Security Room, lift nearby and when he was shown to the young girl (victim), she identified him and also he was identified at the police station. All the witnesses examined on the side of the prosecution and the Sub-Inspector of Police, P.W.9 also examined them and the Accused was arrested at the maternity hospital. P.W.8, Doctor had deposed that in regard to the incident, the young victim girl's mother came and informed him and immediately he called a Female Doctor and asked the said Doctor to examine the young girl and that she had issued medical notes pertaining to the young girl and further stated that the said girl, P.W.4 was admitted as an inpatient in their hospital'.

(3.) In short, the trial Court had categorically observed in its Judgment that all the prosecution witnesses had deposed about the happening of occurrence and finally came to the resultant conclusion that the charge levelled against the Accused (Appellant) under Sec. 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 was proved based on the evidence of Prosecution Witnesses and Documents and imposed a punishment of Five years of Rigorous Imprisonment upon the Accused (Appellant). Considering the fact that the Appellant/Accused was an aged person and he was imposed with a fine of Rs.1,000.00 (Rupees One Thousand only), in default of payment of fine, he was further directed to undergo Three Months Simple Imprisonment. Besides this, the Accused (Appellant) was directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,000.00 to the affected young girl (Minor - P.W.4). During the trial of the case, the Accused was already in prison, the said period was directed to be set off under Sec. 428 of Cr.P.C.