High Court · 2025

Crl.A.No.15 of 2023IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 05.06.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYANCrl.A.No.15 of 2023A.Chandrasekaran... AppellantVs.The State rep. byThe Inspector of Police,All Women Police Station,Dharmapuri,Dharmapuri District.Crime No.3 of 2016... RespondentPRAYER: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C., to call for the records relating to the judgment dated 09.09.2022 made in Special S.C.No.16 of 2016 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Dharmapuri and set aside the same by allowing this criminal appeal.For Appellant: Mr.K.K.N.GaneshanFor Respondent: Mr.S.Rajakumar Additional Public ProsecutorJUDGMENTThis Criminal Appeal has been filed as against the order dated 09.09.2022 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Page 1 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.15 of 2023Mahila Court, Dharmapuri, made in Special S.C.No.16 of 2016, thereby convicting the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 9 (c)(f)(m) r/w 10 (1 count) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (hereinafter referred to as “the POCSO Act”).2.The case of the prosecution is that on the complaint lodged by the victim, the Block Elementary Educational Officer conducted enquiry and on the basis of the enquiry report, the respondent registered the FIR in Crime No.3 of 2016 for the offences punishable under Sections 7 & 8 of the POCSO Act, alleging that the Headmaster of the Mukkulam Panchayat Union Primary School, Dharmapuri District, committed sexual assault on the minor victim girls who are studying third and fourth standard by kissing them and touching their breast and private parts. After completion of investigation, the respondent filed final report and the same has been taken cognizance by the trial Court in Spl.S.C.No.16 of 2016 for the offences punishable under Section 354 (A) of IPC and Sections 9(f) 5 counts, 9(m) 5 counts of the POCSO Act. 3.On the side of the prosecution they had examined P.W.1 to P.W.23 and marked documents in Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.30. On the side of the Page 2 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.15 of 2023accused, no one was examined and marked one document as Ex.D.1. On perusal of the oral and documentary evidences, the trial Court found the accused guilty for the offences punishable under Section 9(c), 9(f), 9(m) r/w. 10 of POCSO Act for one count and sentenced him to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a find of Rs.5,000/- in default to undergo further period of six months simple imprisonment. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed the present appeal.4.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that on the enquiry report conducted by P.W.8 who was the President of the Parents Teachers Association, the respondent registered the FIR. It was lodged due to the previous enmity between them in respect of handling funds sanctioned for the school. The appellant did not allow P.W.8 to misuse the school funds. Therefore, P.W.8 insisted the school children to lodge false complaint and on that basis, they conducted enquiry and submitted report. Though the victim girls P.W.1 to P.W.5 made statements under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., alleging that the appellant had committed sexual assault on them, while they were examining as P.W.1 to P.W.5, P.W.1, 2, 4 and 5 turned hostile and they failed to support the case of the prosecution. As far as P.W.3 is concerned, she Page 3 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.15 of 2023was threatened to the core to give false evidence in such a way before the trial Court. In fact, there were contradictions between the statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., and the deposition before the Court below. Further, the deposition of P.W.3 is not corroborated with any other evidence. P.W.1, 2, 4 and 6 deposed about the good conduct of the appellant and no such sexual assault committed by the appellant towards the students. In fact, none of the parents of the victim children came forward to lodge complaint. The case has been registered only on the basis of the discreet enquiry conducted by P.W.8 and the report. Therefore, when the evidence placed by the prosecution failed to prove the guilty of the prosecution, no presumption can be drawn under Section 29 of the POCSO Act. 5.Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police submitted that though P.W.1, 2, 4 and 5 turned hostile, P.W.3 categorically deposed and the prosecution proved its case beyond any doubt for the offences under Sections 9 (c) (f) (m) r/w. 10 of the POCSO Act. Though P.W.8 conducted enquiry and submitted report and on that basis FIR has been registered, the victim girls also lodged complaints. Especially, the complaint lodged by the Page 4 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.15 of 2023P.W.3, which was marked as Ex.P.3, is the vital document to the case of the prosecution to convict the appellant herein. Therefore, the conviction is not suffered by any lacuna and prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 6.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed before this Court. 7.The appellant while working as Headmaster of Mukkulam Panchayat Union Primary School, Dharmapuri District, there were complaints from the third to fourth standard girl students. All were aged about 8 years to 10 years old. The complaint lodged by the victim girl viz., P.W.3 was marked as Ex.P.3. It is relevant to extract from the complaint as follows :-@bgau; : ePc&htFg;g[ : 3Mk; tFg;g[mg;gh : rdh cy;yhmk;kh : rgpdhre;jpunrfnud; m';f m';f bjhw;wh';f. njhH; nkny if nghw;wh';f/ Kj;jk; ju';f/ njhy; nkhy if nghl brhy;wh';f/ czf;F vd;d gpor;rpdpfpfh/ ghthil cs;s if clw;w';f v nkhny Vwp epf;fpw';f fl;o Page 5 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.15 of 2023gpof;fpwh';f fhJy cdf;F v';f Kj;jk; juy bfhf;Fuh';F/ fr;ryd; gj;J vg;go cs;s if cl;Lu';f itapW cs;s fps;u';f/ ghthl cs;s if cw;w';f vd;W nfl;Lfpwhh;fs;/ ,g;gof;F epc&h/@On the basis of the this complaint, P.W.7 who was being the Block Elementary Educational Officer, conducted enquiry and submitted report. As per the report, as instructed by the superior officers, she lodged complaint which was marked as Ex.P.7. On the basis of the report and the complaint, the respondent registered the FIR in Crime No.3 of 2016. 8.Thereafter, the victims statements were recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. The second victim girl statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., was marked as Ex.P.1. The third victim girl statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., was marked as Ex.P.2. The fourth victim girl statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., was marked as Ex.P.4. The fifth victim girl statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., was marked as Ex.P.5. The fifth victim girl also lodged complaint and the same was marked as Ex.P.6. Page 6 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.15 of 20239.However, except the third victim girl child, other victims did not support the case of the prosecution. It is relevant to extract the evidence of P.W.3 as follows :-@vdJ tPl;oy; vdJ mg;gh. mk;kh. ehd;. vdJ j';if epfh jk;gp ghpj;ghc&h Mfpnahh;fs; cs;nshk;/ vd; mg;gh yhhp Xl;Lfpwhh;/ vd; mk;kh r';fk; itf;fpw ntiyf;F nghfpwhh;/ ehd; Kf;Fsk; Cuhl;rp xd;wpa Jtf;fgs;spapy; 4Mk; tFg;g[ gof;fpnwd;/ re;jpunrfh; v';fs; gs;spapd; bcwl;kh!;luhf ,Uf;fpwhh;/ myPdh. m!;tPdh Mfpnahh;fs; tPL v';fs; tPl;ow;F gf;fj;jpy; cs;sJ/ cz;ik ngRtJ vd;why; cz;ikahfg; ngRtJ/ bgha; ngRtJ vd;why; bgha;ahf ngRtJ/ rhh; ey;yrhuh> bfl;lrhuh> rhh; ,g;g ey;yt';fsh jpUe;jpl;lh';f/ ,g;g m';f m';f bjhLtjpy;iy/ vd;id rhh; bjhl;oUf;fpwhh;/ ,Lg;ghz;l bjhl;oUf;fpwhh;/ iftr;rp bjhl;oUf;fpwhh;/ a{dpghh;k; cs;s iftpl;L bjhl;lhh;/ njhs; nky; if nghLthh;/ Kj;jk; fd;dj;jpy; bfhLg;ghh;/ !;Typy; itj;J gz;zpUf;fpwhh;/ vg;gg; ghh;j;jhYk; gz;zpUf;fhh;/ ehd; mk;khfpl;l brhd;ndd;/ mg;ghfpl;l brhy;yiy/ vd;id mU:h; ePjpkd;wj;jpy; tprhhpj;jhh;fs;/ ,nj khjphp jhd; brhd;ndd;;/@ Page 7 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.15 of 2023Thus it is clear that the appellant had committed sexual assault on the minor victim girls. It is also corroborated by her statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., and the complaint lodged by her was marked as Ex.P.3. Other victim girl children statements recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., are also corroborated with the evidence of P.W.3.10.Though the other victim girls failed to support the case of the prosecution, the accused can be convicted on the basis of the sole testimony of the victim without any further corroboration provided the evidence of the victim inspires confidence and appears to be natural and truthful. Further the victim girl who has undergone sexual assault is not accomplice and to insist for corroboration of the testimony amounts to insult to the womenhood. The evidence of the victim of sex-offence is entitled to great weight absence of corroboration notwithstanding.11.Though the learned counsel appearing for the appellant vehemently contended that P.W.8 had previous enmity with the appellant and as such the false case has been registered as against the appellant, he failed to substantiate the same by let in evidence. That apart, P.W.11 was the Children Protection Officer, Dharmapuri District and on the basis of Page 8 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.15 of 2023the complaint lodged by the victims, he conducted enquiry and submitted report before the District Collector. His statement was also recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., which was marked as Ex.P.13. Similarly, P.W.12 , who was working as Child line Co-ordinator, also conducted enquiry and submitted report. Her statement was also recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., which was marked as Ex.P.14. These statements are clearly corroborated with the evidence of P.W.3. Therefore, the prosecution clearly proved its case and bring the charges for the offences under Sections 9(c), 9(f), 9(m) r/w. 10 of POCSO Act, to home to convict the appellant herein. 12.In view of the above discussions, this Court finds no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the trial Court to interfere and the appeal fails. Accordingly, this Criminal Appeal stands dismissed. 05.06.2025Index: Yes/NoNeutral citation: Yes/NoSpeaking/non-speaking orderrtsPage 9 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.No.15 of 2023G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.rtsTo1. The Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Dharmapuri 2. The Inspector of Police,All Women Police Station,Dharmapuri,Dharmapuri District.3. The Public Prosecutor,Madras High Court,Chennai.Crl.A.No.15 of 202305.06.2025Page 10 of 10