Madras High Court
Muthuramalingam vs State Rep By Its on 11 August, 2023
CRL.A(MD).No. 82 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATE : 11.08.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN
CRL.A(MD).No.82 of 2023
Muthuramalingam : Appellant/Sole Accused
Vs.
State Rep by its,
The Inspector of Police,
Thirupparankundram All Women Police Station,
Madurai City.
(Crime No.15 of 2021) : Respondent/ Complainant
Prayer : This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 1374(2) of Crl.P.C, to
call for the records and set aside the judgment of the trial Court in
Spl.S.C.No.17 of 2020 dated 30.08.2022 on the file of the Special Court
for the Exclusive Trial of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act
Cases cum Sessions Judge, Madurai, and allow this Criminal Appeal.
For Appellant : Mr.M.S.Suresh Kumar
For Respondent : Mr.R.Sivakumar
Government Advocate (Criminal Side)
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.A(MD).No. 82 of 2023
JUDGMENT
This Criminal Appeal has been filed to set aside the judgment passed
by the Exclusive Trial of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act
Cases cum Sessions Judge, Madurai, in Spl.S.C.No.17 of 2020 dated
30.08.2022.
2.The appellant is the sole accused in Spl.S.C.No.17 of 2020 on the
file of the Special Court for the Exclusive Trial of Protection of Children
from Sexual Offences Act Cases cum Sessions Judge, Madurai, filed this
appeal challenging the conviction under Sections 11(i) and 12 of the
POCSO Act, and sentence imposed upon him to undergo three years
Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default, to undergo 6
months Imprisonment and compensation of Rs.50,000/- to the victim girl.
3. Case of the prosecution:
The appellant is a mason and he is living in Pandiselvi Compound,
Kanatchi Amman Cross Street, Mela Anuppanadi, Madurai. In the said
compound, number of persons are residing. According to the prosecution,
on 25.01.2020 at 4.00 pm., when the victim girl and the other girls were
playing in the compound, the appellant caused sexual harassment to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.A(MD).No. 82 of 2023
victim girl by lifting his Dhoti and showing his private part to her. So, the
respondent police, on receipt of the complaint from PW.1, registered a case
in Crime No.3 of 2020 against the appellant for the offence under Sections
11(i) and 12 of the POCSO Act, 2012.
4. The investigation officer-PW.13, after arresting the appellant on
26.01.2020 itself, conducted investigation, collected material documents
and filed final report before the Special Court for the offence under
Sections 11(i) and 12 of POCSO Act. The learned trial Judge, after framing
necessary charge, questioned the accused and the accused pleaded not
guilty and stood for trial.
5. On the side of the prosecution to prove the charges, PW.1 to
PW.13 were examined and Ex.1 to 14 were marked and also Court
document, Ex.C1 also marked. Thereafter, put the incriminative materials
available against the accused in the evidence under Section 313 Cr.P.C.
The accused denied the same as false and posted for the defence evidence
and the appellant never adduced any defence evidence and documentary
evidence.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.A(MD).No. 82 of 2023
6.The learned trial Judge, considering the above documents and
submission of the accused and the Public Prosecutor, convicted the
appellant for the offence under Sections 11(i) and 12 of POCSO Act,
stating that the prosecution proved the case that the appellant lifted his
Dhoti and shown his private parts to the victim girl and thereby, he
committed the offence of sexual harassment and imposed the sentence as
stated above by passing the impugned judgment, dated 30.08.2022 in
Spl.S.C.No.17 of 2020.
7. Challenging the same, the appellant preferred this appeal on the
grounds stated in the memorandum of appeal.
8. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that according to
the prosecution, when the victim girl was playing with her friends namely,
Siva, Sakthi, Viswa and Dhanam, the appellant said to have lifted his dhoti
and shown his private parts to all and asked them to come inside the house.
So, the non-examination of the said friends clearly shows that the
prosecution version is doubtful and the victim statement is not trustworthy
and without any corroboration. So, he seeks for acquittal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.A(MD).No. 82 of 2023
9.The learned Public Prosecutor would submit that the prosecution
clearly proved the charge against the appellant. The evidence of P.W.2, the
victim girl is cogent and trustworthy. She also immediately informed the
occurrence to her mother P.W.1 and the other witnesses. So, the
prosecution clearly proved the sexual harassment of the accused that lifting
his dhoti and shown his private part to the victim girl. The non-
examination of the other witnesses is not material when the evidence of
P.W.2 is cogent and trustworthy. So, the Public Prosecutor prayed for
dismissal of the appeal.
10.This Court considered the rival submission and perused the
records.
11. Now, the only question arises for consideration in this case is
whether the conviction passed by the learned trial Judge is sustained on
the basis of the evidence adduced by the prosecution?
12.From the evidence of the victim girl, it is clear that the appellant
lifted his dhoti and shown his private part to the victim girl. There was no
motive is alleged against the victim girl to implicate the appellant in the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.A(MD).No. 82 of 2023
above occurrence at the cost of her reputation. P.W.2 clearly stated the
occurrence and the same was immediately informed to P.W.1. Even though,
complaint has been immediately made before the Avaniyapuram Police
Station, Madurai District, they refused to take the same. So, P.W.1 went to
the respondent jurisdictional All Women Police Station on the next day
Morning itself i.e., on 26.01.2020 at 07.00 a.m. So, the complaint was
properly made and investigation was conducted in fair manner and final
report was also filed.
13.In view of the above circumstances, this Court find no reason to
disbelieve the evidence of the victim and her mother P.W.1. The victim girl
clearly deposed the fact to constitute the offence under Section 11(i) of
POCSO Act and hence, the learned trial Judge is rightly convicted the
appellant under Sections 11(i) and 12 of POCSO Act. Accordingly, the
question arises for consideration in this case answered against the
appellant.
14. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the
appellant is 53 years old and he is a mason and there was no previous
antecedents. Now, he shifted his residence from the said compound and he
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.A(MD).No. 82 of 2023
is continuously in jail for the past one year. So, he prays for reduction of
sentence of imprisonment. He also submit that he is ready to file
undertaking affidavit that he would not entered into the said compound and
he would not further commit the similar offence.
15.Considered the above circumstances, the conviction passed by
the trial Court for the offence under Sections 11(i) and 12 of POCSO Act
is hereby confirmed. Insofar as the sentence for the offence under Sections
11(i) and 12 of POCSO Act, is concerned, this Court is inclined to reduce
the sentence from 3 years Imprisonment to 1 ½ years Imprisonment.
16.Accordingly, this Criminal Appeal is partly allowed.
11.08.2023
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
dss
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.A(MD).No. 82 of 2023
K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN,J.
dss
To
1.The Special Court for the Exclusive Trial of Protection of Children
from Sexual Offences Act Cases cum Sessions Judge, Madurai,
2.The Inspector of Police,
Thirupparankundram All Women Police Station,
Madurai City.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
4.The Section Officer,
Criminal Section (Records),
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
Order made in
CRL.A(MD).No.82 of 2023
11.08.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
