SEKAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioner is the accused in S.C.No.117 of 1989 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Villupuram and the appellant in C.A.No.196 of 1990 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge, South Arcot at Cuddalore. He was charged and tried for offences under Section 363 and 366, I.P.C. acquitted for the offence under Section 363, I.P.C., but found guilty for the offence under Section 366, I.P.C. Consequently, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. The appeal filed by him was also dismissed by the appellate Court. Hence the present revision.

(2.) P .W. 2 is the victim in this case. P.W.1 is the mother of P.W.2. P.W.2 and accused are known to each other and that she had studied upto 9th standard. The accused used to talk to her in bus stand, school and other places. P.W.1 came to know about that and she reprimanded P.W.2 for her conduct. On 11.2.1989 when P.W.2 was returning from the school, the accused is said to have told her that she is leaving for Gingee on employment and he is prepared to take her and marry her. He also told her that on 13.2.1989, he will wait for her in the chicken -farm and he asked her to go over there. On the statement made by the accused as referred to above on 11.2.1989, P.W.2 met the accused in the place fixed on 13.2.1989 and thereafter they left for a place called Sangeethamangalam. From there, they proceeded to Ananthapuram. From Ananthapuram, they proceeded to Arasamangalam and stayed in the house of one Subramanian.

(3.) P .W.1 is the mother and P.W.2 is the victim herself. P.Ws.3 to 7 and P.W.10 turned hostile. P.W.8 is the Radiologist who examined P.W.2 and gave his opinion that she must be aged over 17 and below 18. Ex.P.2 is the certificate given by him and the x -ray photos pertaining to her is marked as Ex.P.4 series. P.W.9 is the doctor who examined the accused and certified that he was potent. P.W.1 1, another doctor, who examined P.W.2 in this case found that she was committed to intercourse. P.W.12 is the investigating officer who investigated the case earlier and then P.W.13 is the investigating officer who filed the final report. On the basis of the evidence let in before the Court, the trial Court found that the offence under Section 363 was not made out and convicted the accused only for the offence under Section 366,I.P.C.