Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3.3 P.W.1 proceeded to the All Women Police Station, Bhavani, and lodged a complaint under Ex.P.1. P.W.12, who was the Special Sub Inspector of Police attached to the said Police Station, on receipt of the complaint under Ex.P.1 from P.W.1, has registered a case in Cr.No.11/2015 for the offence u/s.366 IPC and u/s.6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, at about 19.45 hours on 12.10.2015. Printed FIR is marked as Ex.P.17. P.W.12 forwarded the original complaint [Ex.P.1] and the Printed FIR [Ex.P.17] to the jurisdictional Magistrate Court.

3.10 P.W. 13, after completion of the investigation, has filed the charge sheet / final report before the Mahila Fast Track Court, Erode, who took it on file in Spl.CC No.7/2016 and issued summons to the accused and on his appearance, had framed charges u/s.366 IPC u/s.9 of the Child Marriage Prohibition Act, 2006 and u/s.6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and questioned the appellant/accused and he pleaded not guilty of the charges levelled against him.

3.11 The prosecution, in order to sustain their case, examined P.Ws.1 to 15 and marked Exs.P.1 to 24 as well as M.O.1 series [X-Rays].

6 Per contra, Mr.R.Ravichandran, learned Government Advocate [Crl.Side] would vehemently contend that admittedly, the appellant/accused was aged about 26 years at the time of the commission of the offence and he was also a married person and he knows pretty well the consequences of his grave act and enticing a minor girl aged about 15 years and odd with a false promise to marry, had a forceful physical relationship with her and as such, the ingredients of the offences for which he had been charged, was proved beyond any reasonable doubt by the prosecution. It is the further submission of the learned Government Advocate [Crl.Side], by drawing the attention of this Court to section 4 of POSCO Act, 2012 as well as to section 30 of the said Act, that there is a presumption drawn against the culpable mental state of mind on the part of the appellant/accused and the appellant has failed to discharge the said burden cast upon him u/s.30 of the POSCO Act. It is also contended by the learned Government Advocate that it is enough to convict the appellant/accused with the testimony of the victim for the offence under POSCO Act, and the said testimony had inspired the confidence and the Trial Court has taken note of the same and on a thorough consideration of the oral and documentary evidences, had rightly reached to convict the appellant/accused for the commission of the offences u/s.366 IPC and u/s.4 of the POSCO Act and imposed the maximum sentence of imprisonment for life and submitted that in the light of the facts and circumstances and this Court, in exercise of its Appellate jurisdiction, may not interfere with the same.

23 The evidence let in by the prosecution would also satisfy the ingredients of the offence u/s.366 IPC for the reason that the victim who was a minor girl, was induced to come with him for the purpose of marrying the appellant/accused on the ground that the appellant/accused threatened to commit suicide and therefore, she went with him and thereafter, the facts leading to the commission of the offence u/s.4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, had taken place and the Trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence let in, in that regard and convicted and sentenced the appellant/accused for the commission of the offence u/s.366 IPC. This Court finds no infirmity in the said findings and hence, the conviction and sentence imposed for the offence u/s.366 IPC is also confirmed.