[Cites 14, Cited by 0]
Madras High Court
Vijayan vs The State Rep By on 24 February, 2026
2026:MHC:948
CRL A No.337 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 24-02-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
CRL A No.337 of 2023
Vijayan,
S/o.Govindhan,
D.No.559, Gudalur,
Harur,
Harur Post,
Dharmapuri.
...Appellant/Accused
Vs
The State Rep by,
The Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station, East,
Coimbatore City.
Cr.No.12/2020.
...Respondent/Complainant
Prayer : Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 of the Criminal Procedure
Code, to set aside the Judgment passed in Spl.C.C.No.5/2021 on the file of the
Principal Special Court for exclusive trial of cases under POCSO Act,
Coimbatore, whereby, convicting the appellant and sentenced to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for term of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in
default of payment of fine to undergo one month simple imprisonment and
allow the appeal.
For Appellant : M/S.T.Panchatsaram
For Respondent: Mr.S.Raja Kumar
Additional Public Prosecutor
__________
Page1 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/03/2026 03:57:53 pm )
CRL A No.337 of 2023
JUDGMENT
This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the accused, challenging the
Judgment dated 31.01.2023 passed in Spl.C.C.No.5 of 2021 by the learned
Sessions Judge, Principal Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under
POCSO Act, Coimbatore, convicting the accused for the offence under Section
323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and sentencing him to undergo one year of
rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to suffer one
month of simple imprisonment.
2(a). The case of the prosecution is that the appellant/accused is the father
of the victim girl; that he had committed aggravated sexual assault on the victim
girl on several occasions by inappropriately touching the private part of the
victim girl and also exposing his private part to the victim girl; that the appellant
had committed the offence of criminal intimidation by threatening the victim of
dire consequences if she discloses the occurrences to anybody else; that the
appellant had committed the sexual harassment to the victim girl; and that the
appellant had assaulted the victim girl by slapping her and thus committed the
offences under Sections 9(n) r/w 10 and 11(i) r/w 12 of the Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as
“the POCSO Act”) and Sections 323 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
(hereinafter referred to as “the IPC”).
__________
Page2 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/03/2026 03:57:53 pm )
(b) On a complaint [Ex.P1] given by the victim, P.W.1, an FIR [Ex.P8]
was registered in Crime No.12 of 2020 for the offences under Sections 9(n) r/w
10 and 11(i) r/w 12 of the POCSO Act and Sections 323 and 506(ii) of the IPC
by the Sub-Inspector of Police, P.W.11. The Inspector of Police, P.W.12, took
up the investigation and filed the Final Report against the appellant for the
offences under Sections 9(i)(l), (n) r/w 10 and 11(i) r/w 12 of the POCSO Act
and Sections 323 and 506(i) of the IPC before the learned Sessions Judge,
Principal Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act,
Coimbatore.
(c) On the appearance of the accused, the provisions of Section 207
Cr.P.C. were complied with, and the case was taken on file as Spl.C.C.No.5 of
2021 by the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases
under POCSO Act, Coimbatore. The Trial Court framed four charges against
the accused/appellant for the offences under Sections 9(i)(l),(n) r/w 10, 11(i) r/w
12 of the POCSO Act, and Sections 323 and 506(i) of the IPC. During the trial,
when questioned, the accused pleaded 'not guilty.'
(d). Before the Trial Court, the prosecution had examined 12 witnesses as
P.W.1 to P.W.12 and marked 14 exhibits as Exs.P1 to P14. When the accused
__________
Page3 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/03/2026 03:57:53 pm )
was questioned, u/s.313 Cr.P.C., on the incriminating circumstances appearing
against him, he denied the same. The accused neither examined any witness nor
marked any document on his side. The statement of the victim under Section
164(5) of Cr.P.C. was marked as Ex.C1.
(e) The Trial Court, after consideration of the evidence, had acquitted the
accused/appellant for the offences under Sections 9(i)(l)(n) r/w 10 and 11(i) r/w
12 of the POCSO Act and Section 506(i) of the IPC. The accused/appellant was
convicted for the offence under Section 323 of the IPC and sentenced as stated
in paragraph No.1 of this Judgment. Aggrieved by the said conviction and
sentence, the accused had preferred the instant appeal.
3. Mr.T.Panchatsaram, the learned counsel for the appellant/accused,
would submit that admittedly the appellant is the father of the victim girl; that
the victim girl was disbelieved as regards the allegation of sexual assault and
harassment; that the alleged attack on the victim girl was only to reprimand her
even assuming that the victim girl can be believed; that since the complaint
itself is motivated, the victim ought to have been disbelieved even with regard
to the alleged attack; and in any case, submitted that the appellant has
undergone almost four months imprisonment during investigation and prayed
for reduction of sentence.
__________
Page4 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/03/2026 03:57:53 pm )
4. Mr.S.Raja Kumar, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing
for the respondent, per contra, submitted that the Judgment of the Trial Court
cannot be faulted; that the Trial Court had considered the evidence in the right
perspective and acquitted the appellant of all the charges except Section 323
IPC; and that since there is no infirmity in the finding of guilt, the sentence also
does not suffer from any infirmity and prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
5. As stated earlier, the prosecution had examined twelve witnesses.
P.W.1 is the victim girl. P.W.2 is the mother of the victim girl. P.W.3 is the
brother of the victim girl. P.W.4 is the sister of the victim girl. P.W.5 is the
Observation Mahazar witness. P.W.6 to P.W.8 are the Head Constables who
assisted the Investigating Officer. P.W.9 is the Doctor, who had examined the
appellant and issued Exs.P5 and P6 certificates. P.W.10 is the Doctor, who had
examined the victim girl and issued the Medical Examination Report [Ex.P7].
P.W.11 is the Sub Inspector of Police, who registered the FIR [Ex. P8]. P.W.12
is the Investigating Officer who filed the Final Report.
6. As stated above, the prosecution case with regard to the alleged offence
of sexual assault and sexual harassment has been disbelieved by the Trial Court.
The appellant was also acquitted of the offence under Section 506(i) of the IPC.
__________
Page5 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/03/2026 03:57:53 pm )
The State has not challenged the said finding. The charge under Section 323 of
the IPC is based on the fact that the appellant had caused hurt to the victim girl
by slapping her.
7. P.W.1 to P.W.5 had been treated as hostile by the prosecution, as they
did not support the prosecution case in respect of the alleged offences under
Sections 9, 10, 11, and 12 of the POCSO Act. The victim had only stated about
the hurt caused to her by the appellant. This Court is of the view that the
victim’s evidence, insofar as it supports the prosecution case of causing hurt,
can be believed. The cross-examination of the victim on that aspect is of no
avail to the defence.
8. Therefore, this Court finds no infirmity in the finding of guilt insofar as
the offence under Section 323 IPC is concerned. However, considering the fact
that the appellant is the father of the victim girl and in view of the relationship,
this Court is of the view that the ends of justice would be met if the appellant is
sentenced to the period of imprisonment already undergone, namely from
08.09.2020 to 12.01.2021, as recorded in the Trial Court Judgment.
Accordingly, it is ordered as follows:
(i) The conviction of the appellant for the offence under
Section 323 of the IPC, by the learned Sessions Judge,
__________
Page6 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/03/2026 03:57:53 pm )
Principal Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under
POCSO Act, Coimbatore, vide Judgment dated 31.01.2023 in
Spl.C.C.No.5 of 2021, is confirmed.
(ii) However, the sentence imposed on the appellant,
i.e., rigorous imprisonment for one year, is modified to that of
the period already undergone. The fine imposed and the default
sentence shall remain unaltered.
9. In the result, the Criminal Appeal stands partly-allowed.
24-02-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
dk
__________
Page7 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/03/2026 03:57:53 pm )
To
1. The Sessions Judge,
Principal Special Court for
Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act,
Coimbatore.
2. The Inspector of Police,
All women Police Station, East,
Coimbatore City.
3. The Public Prosecutor
High Court of Madras.
__________
Page8 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/03/2026 03:57:53 pm )
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
dk
24-02-2026
__________
Page9 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/03/2026 03:57:53 pm )
