Madras High Court
Elangovan vs The State Rep By on 17 October, 2022
Crl.RC.No.431 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 17.10.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
Crl.RC.No.431 of 2018
1.Elangovan
2.Santhose
3.Senthil ... Petitioners/A1,6 & 7
Versus
The State Rep by
The Inspector of Police,
Puzhal Police Station,
Chennai
(crime No.307 of 2003) ... Respondent
PRAYER: Criminal Revision has been filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records of the order in
CA.No.96 of 2013 dated 19.03.2018 passed by the learned I Additional
District and Sessions Judge, Thiruvallur District confirming the judgment of
the learned Assistant Sessions Court, Ponneri in SC.No.112 of 2006 dated
17.09.2013 and to set aside the same.
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.RC.No.431 of 2018
For Petitioners : Ms.S.Vinodha
for Mr.P.Sampath
For Respondent : Mr.A.Gopinath,
Government Advocate(crl.side)
ORDER
This criminal revision is arising out of the judgment passed in
CA.No.96 of 2013 dated 19.03.2018 by the learned I Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Thiruvallur District, thereby confirming the sentence passed
by the learned Assistant Sessions Court, Ponneri in SC.No.112 of 2006
dated 17.09.2013, thereby convicted the petitioners for the offences under
Sections 366, 376 of IPC r/w 34 of IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the victim was missing from
26.08.2003. Therefore, her father lodged complaint before the respondent.
FIR was registered in crime No.307 of 2003 under girl missing. Thereafter,
her father filed habeas corpus writ petition before this Court. In the said writ
petition, the victim was rescued and produced before the Magistrate
concerned. Thereafter, the respondent altered the offences into Sections
366, 376 and r/w 34 of IPC. There are totally seven accused. On
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.RC.No.431 of 2018
26.08.2003, the victim was in school studying tenth standard. While being
so at 12.00 noon, the sixth accused went inside the classroom and requested
to send her with him. However, the school authorities refused to send her
out. Therefore when she returned from school at about 4.25 p.m. to the bus
stop, A6 and A7 asked her to come to the house of one, Elango i.e. the first
accused for the reason there was some issue. They compelled the victim and
got into auto. They proceeded to the house of Elango, where the said Elango
and his parents were present. Thereafter, the first accused had taken her to
Ranipet. Next day morning, he tied 'thali' on the victim and went to
Bangalore. Thereafter, they went to Hugli and there, they stayed for 2 ½
months. During their stay, the first accused on compulsion, committed rape
on her repeatedly.
2.1 The further case of the prosecution is that after the complaint
made by her parents, she was rescued from the hands of the first accused
and produced before the court below. She was taken to medical examination
and found that she was raped by the first accused. Therefore, on the
alteration report, the respondent altered the offences into Sections 366, 376
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.RC.No.431 of 2018
of IPC and r/w 34 of IPC. After completion of investigation, the first
accused was charged for the offence under Sections 366, 376 of IPC and A6
and A7 were charged for the offences under Sections 366 r/w 34 of IPC.
3. The prosecution had examined PW1 to PW11 and marked
Ex.P1 to Ex.P10. On the side of the accused persons, no one was examined
and no documents were marked. On perusal of the oral and documentary
evidence, the trial court found the first accused guilty for the offence under
Sections 366 and 376 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo three years
rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 366 of IPC and
sentenced him to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment for the
offence under Section 376 of IPC and also imposed fine of Rs.5,000/-.
Insofar as A6 and A7, they were convicted for the offences under Section
366 r/w 34 of IPC and sentenced them to undergo three years rigorous
imprisonment and also fine of Rs.5,000/- Aggrieved by the same, the
petitioners preferred appeal and the same was also dismissed and confirmed
the conviction and sentenced imposed by the trial court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.RC.No.431 of 2018
4. The petitioner raised grounds that the investigation officer
failed to examine the victim girl and to record her statement under Section
164 of CrPC immediately after securing her. The petitioners never used any
force or threatened the victim to come along with them. She fell in love with
the first petitioner herein and on her own, she came there and eloped to
Bangalore. No one has kidnapped her and no one compelled her to come
with them. She was never abducted or restrained from her movements. On
her own, she stayed with the first petitioner for the period of 2 ½ months
and they lived together as husband and wife. Only on the complaint lodged
by the father of the victim, the victim was secured from the first accused.
Insofar the second and third petitioners, they were charged for the offences
under Section 366 r/w 34 of IPC. Only on the instruction given by the first
accused and the victim, they brought her to the house of the first accused.
Except the said allegation, no other overt acts as against petitioners 2 & 3 to
convict them for the offences under Section 366 r/w 34 of IPC.
5. Heard, the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned
Government Advocate(crl.side) appearing for the respondent / police.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.RC.No.431 of 2018
6. On perusal of the records, revealed that nowhere stated that the
first petitioner and the victim fell in love and the victim eloped with him to
Bangalore and thereafter to Hugli. The petitioners never took that stand and
as well as failed to bring any witness to that effect to disprove the case of
the prosecution. The victim's evidence is the best evidence and it may not be
corroborated with other witnesses. Though stated that she was kidnapped by
the petitioners and stayed for 2 ½ months with the first petitioner, she never
stated that she fell in love with him and she lived with the first accused
happily. Only on threatening and compulsion, she was abducted by the first
accused and on compulsion and also threatening her, he committed rape on
her. At the time of occurrence, the victim was only aged about 16 years and
she was studying tenth standard. In order to prove her age, PW10 was
examined and marked transfer certificate as Ex.P8 and the register of tenth
standard. PW1 and PW2 are her parents and they deposed that on
26.08.2003, she was missing and immediately they lodged complaint. The
same was registered under girl missing in crime No.307 of 2003. They
further deposed that thereafter they filed habeas corpus petition before this
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.RC.No.431 of 2018
Court and thereafter, the respondent rescued the victim girl from the hands
of the first petitioner herein.
7. Though the victim's statement was not recorded under Section
164 of Cr.P.C., she categorically deposed before the trial court and the same
was also corroborated with PW1 and PW2. Thereafter, she was subjected to
medical examination and the doctor who examined the victim was examined
as PW9. She deposed that the victim was subjected to rape and hymen is not
intact. Therefore, the prosecution by clinching and cogent evidence, proved
the case beyond any reasonable doubt. Therefore, the trial court rightly
convicted the petitioners herein and confirmed by the first appellate court.
As such, there is absolutely no circumstances warranting to interfere with
the orders passed by the courts below.
8. Accordingly, this criminal revision is dismissed.
17.10.2022
Internet:Yes
Index:Yes/No
Speaking/Non speaking order
lok
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.RC.No.431 of 2018
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN. J,
lok
To
1.The learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge,
Thiruvallur District
2.The learned Assistant Sessions Court,
Ponneri
3.The Inspector of Police,
Puzhal Police Station,
Chennai
4.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Madras
Crl.RC.No.431 of 2018
17.10.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
