Madras High Court
P.Prakash vs The State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police on 12 March, 2026
2026:MHC:1031
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
RESERVED ON : 06.02.2026
PRONOUNCED ON : 12.03.2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
P.Prakash,
S/o.Perumal,
Pudhukadu Village,
Thonnakuttahalli Post,
Pennagaram Taluk,
Dharmapuri District. ... Appellant / Accused
versus
The State rep. by the Inspector of Police,
Pennagaram All Women Police Station,
Dharmapuri District. ... Respondent/Complainant
(Crime No.7 of 2016)
Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. against the
judgment dated 30.11.2021 in Spl.S.C.No.7 of 2017 on the file of the learned
Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Dharmapuri.
For Appellant : Mr.C.P.Sivamohan
For Respondent : Mr.R.Kishore Kumar
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
1/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
JUDGMENT
This Criminal Appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated
30.11.2021 in Spl.S.C. No.7 of 2017 on the file of the learned Sessions
Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Dharmapuri.
2. The trial court convicted the appellant and sentenced as
follows:-
Penal Provisions Sentence of Fine Amount
Imprisonment
Section 6 of POCSO Act 10 years RI Rs.5,000/-, in default to
undergo 6 months SI
3. According to the prosecution, the victim/PW1 minor girl aged
14 years was studying 10th standard in Government Higher Secondary
School at Athimarathur. PW1 is staying along with her grandmother at
Pudhukadu of Eriyur. PW2/father and PW3/mother of the victim are staying
away at Coimbatore and doing mason work for their livelihood and they
visit the village once in a month. PW1’s brothers were also staying with her
grandmother and all were going to school.
2/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
4. The accused is the parental uncle’s son/ cousin brother of the
victim and their house is also situated near the victim’s house. Earlier, since
the accused’s house was under construction, all of them stayed together in
the grandmother’s house. The accused inspite of being a blood relative/
cousin brother of the victim, taking advantage, had forcible sexual
intercourse on several occasions since the time she was in 9 th std.
Immediately after Vinayakar Chathurthi festival, the accused who had come
to victim’s house again had forcible sexual relationship.
5. The victim got severe stomach pain and feared that she was
pregnant. When she informed the accused, he asked her to say that some of
them had kidnapped, injucted and raped her. Due to pain and fear, without
going to school, she had gone to the nearby forest area. PW4, on noticing the
victim in uniform, enquired and intimated to her father/PW2 and took her to
village Oor Gounder’s house.
6. PW1 narrated the incident to her parents, PW2 and PW3. PW1
lodged the complaint/Ex.P1. PW12/Sub-Inspector of Police received the
3/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
complaint and registered FIR/Ex.P13. Thereafter PW13 took up the
investigation, prepared Ex.P3/ observation mahazar and Ex.P14/Rough
sketch. Requisition for medical examination of the victim was made in
Ex.P6. Head Constable/PW7 took the victim/PW1 for medical examination.
PW9/Doctor examined the victim and issued Accident Register/Ex.P8 and
the medical opinion/Ex.P10. The accused was thereafter arrested and sent
for medical examination by Doctor/PW11, who gave medical
opinion/Ex.P11. PW8/Head Constable took the victim before the learned
Judicial Magistrate No.II, Dharmapuri, where the statement under Section
164(5) Cr.P.C, was recorded in Ex.P2.
7. PW13/Inspector of Police thereafter altered the offence from
Sections 341, 506(i) IPC and 5(l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act to Section 6 r/w 5(n)
(l) of POCSO Act and 506(i) IPC through the alteration report/Ex.P18. After
completion of investigation, PW13 filed the final report.
8. The trial court, on taking the case on file, issued summons,
complied with the provisions of Section 207 of Cr.P.C. and framed the
charges against the accused under Section 5(n)(l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act and
4/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
506(i) IPC. When questioned, the accused pleaded not guilty and stood trial.
In order to prove the charges, the prosecution examined 8 witnesses as PW1
to PW13 and marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P18.
9. After completion of the prosecution evidence, when the accused
was questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C., about the incriminating materials
available he denied the same as false. However, neither any witnesses were
examined nor any documents were marked on the side of the accused.
10. The trial court after conclusion of the arguments and on
analyzing the evidences, found the accused guilty of the charges leveled and
thereby convicted the accused and imposed sentence as stated supra.
Assailing the conviction and sentence, the accused has preferred the above
appeal.
11. Mr.C.P.Sivamohan, learned counsel appearing for the appellant
contended that there is an inordinate delay in lodging the FIR, which is fatal
to the case of the prosecution. Further, when the FIR/Ex.P13 mentions that
the occurrence had happened from 01.03.2015 to 07.09.2016 there had been
no explanation for the absence of any complaint during this period and also
5/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
no further explanation for further delay of 40 days in registering the FIR,
from the date of the complaint.
12. He further contended that there is a huge discrepancy in the
evidence, particularly in the evidence of victim/PW1. Even according to
PW1, she was kidnapped by 4 persons, which includes one known person
and was raped. The testimony of PW1 is inconsistent, unreliable and
untrustworthy. When the testimony of PW1 is not corroborated by any other
evidence and lacks credibility, the trial court erroneously convicted the
appellant merely on the sole testimony of PW1. The prosecution failed to
examine the Oor Gounder before whom the victim was produced by PW4
and also the victims grand mother. There is an inconsistent version in respect
of information made to PW2 and PW3, when PW4 states that he informed to
PW2, whereas as per the victim, she informed it to her mother/PW3.
13. Learned counsel by relying on the evidence of Doctor/PW9,
submitted that the hymen was not intact probably only due to the riding of
bicycle by the victim. The further opinion of the Doctor based on the finger
test cannot be relied on, as the same has been deprecated by the Courts, as it
6/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
is violative of Article 21 of the Constitution. There was a dispute between
the parents of accused and PW1, which led to the false complaint.
14. In support of his contentions, learned counsel relied on the
following decisions:-
(i) Santosh Prasad v. State of Bihar [2020) 3 SCC 443]
(ii) Chellappan v. State [(2016) 4 MLJ (Crl) 611]
(iii) Mohammed Sulthan @ Shafeek v. State [Crl.A.No.772 of 2019 dated 30.07.2021]
(iv) Karthikeyan v. State [Crl.A.(MD)No.129 of 2016 dated 20.09.2021]
15. Per contra, Mr.R.Kishore Kumar, learned Government
Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the State contended that, PW1 has given
a clear and cogent evidence in respect of the forceful sexual relationship had
by the accused on several occasions. PW1 who was helpless due to pain and
fear, went to the nearby forest area in school uniform and PW4 has given
evidence corroborating the evidence of PW1. The accused had repeated
forceful sexual relationship by threatening the minor victim. The evidence of
Doctor/PW9 coupled with the medical opinion/Ex.P10, establishes that the
victim had been subjected to sexual relationship.
7/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
16. The allegation of kidnap and rape was retracted by the
complainant/PW1 herself even before the Doctor, where she had stated that
she said so only based on the instigation and instruction of the accused. He
further submitted that when the prosecution has established the foundational
facts, the trial court rightly in view of the presumption under Section 29 of
POCSO Act and in the absence of rebuttal by the accused, had convicted and
imposed the sentence, which needs no interference.
17. Heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available
on record.
18. It is an unfortunate case where the victim/PW1 had suffered
sexual assault in the hands of her blood relative cousin brother who ought to
have been a protector. PW1 and her brothers were staying with her
grandmother in the village and were going to school. PW2 and PW3, father
and mother of the victim, were staying far away in Coimbatore doing mason
work for their livelihood. The appellant, whose house is situated adjacent to
the victim grandmother’s house, is charged with the offence of aggravated
8/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
penetrative sexual assault for having sexually assaulted the minor on several
occasions, for nearly more than a year.
19. In the cases invoking offences under POCSO Act, the
prosecution has to first establish that the victim was a minor, as per Sec.2(d)
of the Act. As per PW1, her date of birth is 17.03.2002 and studied up to 10 th
std. PW5/Head Master of the school had deposed that PW1 studied 10 th
standard in their school in the academic year 2016-17 and the date of birth of
the victim is 17.03.2002. The admission register of the school/ Ex.P4 and the
school certificate/ Ex.P5, pertaining to the victim PW1 has been marked.
The age of the victim has not been disputed by the accused. As per the
evidence of PW5 coupled with the documents in Ex.P4 and Ex.P5, the date
of birth of the victim is 17.03.2002 and aged 14 years during the time of
occurrence. As such, it has been established that the victim was a minor
during the alleged occurrence.
20. PW1/victim had deposed that the accused started to misbehave
with her as they were all staying together in the grandmother’s house, when
the accused’s house was under construction. At that time, she was studying
9/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
th
9 standard and the accused had sexual intercourse with her. Thereafter, the
accused had come to her house on several occasions and had sexual
relationship. In spite of PW1 warning him that it is wrong, but still he
continued to have sexual relationship with her.
21. Even 2 days after Vinayakar Chathurthi festival, he had come to
the house and had sexual relationship with her. On the next day when she
was going to school, she felt pain and feared that she would have become
pregnant. When she informed the accused, he just ignored, saying nothing
like that. As such, she had kept the school bag and skipped the school and
went to the nearby forest area, where PW4 saw her and informed to her
parents, PW2 and PW3.
22. In fact, even in the complaint/Ex.P1 given by victim, she has
clearly stated that when she was studying 9th standard, the accused came to
her grandmother’s house and had forcible sexual intercourse with her and
thereafter, every time he came to the village, he had forcible sexual
relationship and last of such sexual relationship was 2 days after Vinayakar
Chathurthi festival. In the statement of the victim/Ex.P2, under Sec.164(5)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
Cr.P.C also, the victim had clearly stated that the accused had sexual
intercourse and he had been having sexual relationship continuously even
after some dispute among their parents and the last of such relationship was
2 days after Vinayakar Chathurthi festival.
23. PW1’s testimony is clear and cogent to the effect that the
accused had sexual relationship with her when she studied 9 th std, as they
were staying together in the grand mother house. Thereafter the accused
continued to have sexual relation ship on several occasions and even after
the dispute regarding taking water between their parents, still the accused
continued to have sexual relationship.
24. PW2/father and PW3/mother both had given evidence to the
effect that they had been staying at Coimbatore for work and PW1 who was
staying with the grandmother, had been repeatedly sexually assaulted by the
accused who is the blood relative. The learned counsel for the appellant
mainly argued that the entire case is fabricated due to enmity and the enmity
has been admitted by both PW1 and PW2. In fact, though PW2/father had
admitted that there had been some dispute with his brother regarding taking
11/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
water, but he had clearly stated that the same has been sorted out and
thereafter there had been no such problem. PW1 to PW3 had denied the
suggestions put forth by the defence, in respect of any prevailing dispute and
that only due to enmity a false complaint has been lodged.
25. PW4/independent witness, had clearly deposed that on finding
the victim in the forest area in uniform, he enquired and on sensing that there
was some problem, he had intimated the parents, PW2 and PW3.
Observation mahazar Ex.P3 has been prepared in his presence. PW4
evidence corroborates with the evidence of PW1, regarding her isolated
presence in the forest area in the school uniform.
26. PW9 /Doctor had deposed that she had examined the victim and
issued the Accident Register/Ex.P8 and medical opinion/Ex.P10. Both in the
Ex.P8 and Ex.P10, after recording the version of the victim about the alleged
assault and rape by 1 known and 3 unknown persons, it is recorded that later
PW1 had contradicted her statement and said that 1 known person had
sexually assaulted her.
12/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
27. As per the medical opinion Ex.P10, there was no external injury
found over the genitals/body of the victim and therefore there is no evidence
of any recent sexual intercourse in the victim. The opinion further discloses
that the victim’s hymen is not intact and the vagina admits only one finger.
PW9 in her evidence has stated that there is a possibility that the hymen may
not be intact due to the victim riding a bicycle and there is no evidence of
any possibility of rape.
28. Even though it is suggested that the hymen may not be intact
due to the riding of a bicycle, but from the evidence of PW9 coupled with
Ex.P8 and Ex.P10, it could be seen that the victim had been subjected to
sexual relationship and further there is no evidence of rape or recent sexual
intercourse. The victim being a minor, any consensual sexual relationship is
immaterial and it has been established that the victim had been subjected to
sexual relationship.
29. PW11/Doctor deposed that he had examined the accused and
issued the medical opinion Ex.P11. The medical opinion clearly reveals that
13/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
the accused is potent, sexually active and capable of being involved in the
sexual relationship.
30. PW7, PW8 and PW10 have deposed in respect of taking the
victim and accused for medical examination and recording the statement
before the Magistrate. PW12 and PW13 have clearly deposed regarding the
registration of Ex.P13 and collecting medical reports Ex.P9 and Ex.P12 and
the evidences are in corroboration of the testimony of PW1.
31. It is vehemently contended on the side of the appellant that the
conviction is based merely on the testimony of PW1 which is not
corroborated by any other evidence and further there are lot of discrepancies
in the testimony of PW1. At this juncture it is opposite to refer to the
decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ganesan v. State
reported in (2020) 10 SCC 573. The Hon’ble Court while deciding the issue
as to whether, in the case involving sexual harassment, molestation, etc.,
there can be conviction on the sole evidence of the prosecutrix held that
conviction can be made based on the sole testimony of the victim, if the
evidence is found to be trustworthy and unblemished with sterling quality.
14/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
Further minor discrepancies and contradictions shall not be a ground to
throw out, otherwise reliable prosecution case. The relevant portion is
extracted as under:-
“10.1. Whether, in the case involving sexual harassment, molestation,
etc., can there be conviction on the sole evidence of the prosecutrix, …..
11. In State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh, (1996) 2 SCC 384 : 1996
SCC (Cri) 316], this Court held that in cases involving sexual
harassment, molestation, etc. the court is duty-bound to deal with
such cases with utmost sensitivity. Minor contradictions or
insignificant discrepancies in the statement of a prosecutrix
should not be a ground for throwing out an otherwise reliable
prosecution case. Evidence of the victim of sexual assault is
enough for conviction and it does not require any corroboration
unless there are compelling reasons for seeking corroboration.
The court may look for some assurances of her statement to
satisfy judicial conscience. The statement of the prosecutrix is
more reliable than that of an injured witness as she is not an
accomplice. The Court further held that the delay in filing FIR for
sexual offence may not be even properly explained, but if found
natural, the accused cannot be given any benefit thereof. The
Court observed as under: (SCC pp. 394-96 & 403, paras 8 & 21)
‘8. … The court overlooked the situation in which a poor
helpless minor girl had found herself in the company of
three desperate young men who were threatening her and
preventing her from raising any alarm. Again, if the
investigating officer did not conduct the investigation
15/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
properly or was negligent in not being able to trace out
the driver or the car, how can that become a ground to
discredit the testimony of the prosecutrix? The prosecutrix
had no control over the investigating agency and the
negligence of an investigating officer could not affect the
credibility of the statement of the prosecutrix. … The
courts must, while evaluating evidence, remain alive to the
fact that in a case of rape, no self-respecting woman
would come forward in a court just to make a humiliating
statement against her honour such as is involved in the
commission of rape on her. In cases involving sexual
molestation, supposed considerations which have no
material effect on the veracity of the prosecution case or
even discrepancies in the statement of the prosecutrix
should not, unless the discrepancies are such which are of
fatal nature, be allowed to throw out an otherwise reliable
prosecution case. … Seeking corroboration of her
statement before relying upon the same, as a rule, in such
cases amounts to adding insult to injury. … Corroboration
as a condition for judicial reliance on the testimony of the
prosecutrix is not a requirement of law but a guidance of
prudence under given circumstances. …
***
21. … The courts should examine the broader
probabilities of a case and not get swayed by minor
contradictions or insignificant discrepancies in the
statement of the prosecutrix, which are not of a fatal
nature, to throw out an otherwise reliable prosecution
case. If evidence of the prosecutrix inspires confidence, it
must be relied upon without seeking corroboration of her
16/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
statement in material particulars. If for some reason the
court finds it difficult to place implicit reliance on her
testimony, it may look for evidence which may
lend assurance to her testimony, short of corroboration
required in the case of an accomplice. The testimony of
the prosecutrix must be appreciated in the background of
the entire case and the trial court must be alive to its
responsibility and be sensitive while dealing with cases
involving sexual molestations.’
(emphasis in original)
….
14. Thus, the law that emerges on the issue is to the effect that the
statement of the prosecutrix, if found to be worthy of credence and
reliable, requires no corroboration. The court may convict the accused on
the sole testimony of the prosecutrix.”
10.2. In Krishan Kumar Malik v. State of Haryana, (2011) 7 SCC
130 : (2011) 3 SCC (Cri) 61], it is observed and held by this Court that to
hold an accused guilty for commission of an offence of rape, the solitary
evidence of the prosecutrix is sufficient, provided the same inspires
confidence and appears to be absolutely trustworthy, unblemished and
should be of sterling quality.
10.3. Who can be said to be a “sterling witness”, has been dealt
with and considered by this Court in Rai Sandeep v. State (NCT of Delhi),
(2012) 8 SCC 21 : (2012) 3 SCC (Cri) 750]. In para 22, it is observed and
held as under: (SCC p. 29)
“22. In our considered opinion, the “sterling witness” should be
of a very high quality and calibre whose version should,
17/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
therefore, be unassailable. The court considering the version of
such witness should be in a position to accept it for its face value
without any hesitation. To test the quality of such a witness, the
status of the witness would be immaterial and what would be
relevant is the truthfulness of the statement made by such a
witness. What would be more relevant would be the consistency
of the statement right from the starting point till the end, namely,
at the time when the witness makes the initial statement and
ultimately before the court. It should be natural and consistent
with the case of the prosecution qua the accused. There should
not be any prevarication in the version of such a witness. The
witness should be in a position to withstand the cross-
examination of any length and howsoever strenuous it may be
and under no circumstance should give room for any doubt as to
the factum of the occurrence, the persons involved, as well as the
sequence of it. Such a version should have co-relation with each
and every one of other supporting material such as the
recoveries made, the weapons used, the manner of offence
committed, the scientific evidence and the expert opinion. The
said version should consistently match with the version of every
other witness. It can even be stated that it should be akin to the
test applied in the case of circumstantial evidence where there
should not be any missing link in the chain of circumstances to
hold the accused guilty of the offence alleged against him. Only
if the version of such a witness qualifies the above test as well as
all other such similar tests to be applied, can it be held that such
a witness can be called as a “sterling witness” whose version
can be accepted by the court without any corroboration and
based on which the guilty can be punished. To be more precise,
the version of the said witness on the core spectrum of the crime
18/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
should remain intact while all other attendant materials, namely,
oral, documentary and material objects should match the said
version in material particulars in order to enable the court
trying the offence to rely on the core version to sieve the other
supporting materials for holding the offender guilty of the charge
alleged.”
32. From the above, it is clear that in the cases involving sexual
assault, the sole testimony of the victim is sufficient and the conviction
would be justified and permissible if the testimony is found reliable and
trustworthy with sterling quality. Further minor contradictions or
insignificant discrepancies in the statement of a prosecutrix shall not be
taken as a ground to throw out an otherwise reliable prosecution case.
33. In the instant case, the victim has been consistent and clear in
her complaint Ex.P1, statement in Ex.P2 and evidence regarding the sexual
relation ship had by the accused on several occasions, from her studying in
9th std to 10th std. In the substantive evidence when examined in court, PW1
had clearly deposed, that the accused had sexual relationship with her when
she was studying 9th standard. The victim had given clear and cogent
evidence in respect of the sexual intercourse had by the accused on several
occasions, inspite of PW1 warning that it is wrong.
19/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
34. Even though there are some contradictions regarding the
allegation of kidnap and rape, the minor discrepancies does not in any way
affect or discredit her testimony which cogently establishes the continued
sexual relationship had by the accused. The victim had also cogently
explained that she came out with the version of kidnap and rape only based
on the instruction of the accused. It could be seen that since the accused had
sexual relationship with his sister PW1, which is a prohibited relationship,
the victim initially feared to reveal the relationship due to shame and acted
as per the instructions of the accused.
35. The prosecution has established the foundational facts that the
victim is a minor and she has been subjected to continued sexual relationship
by the accused. When once the foundational facts are established, there is a
statutory presumption under Section 29 of POCSO Act and it is upon the
accused to dislodge the presumption. However, the accused had neither
offered any explanation during the questioning under Section 313 Cr.P.C.
nor brought in any oral or documentary evidence to rebut the presumption.
20/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
36. The appellant being a blood relative and cousin of PW1, who is
the natural protector after her parents had taking advantage of the victim
being alone in the grandmother’s house, as her parents were staying far away
for their livelihood, had sexually exploited the victim. The accused had
continued the sexual exploitation of the victim for over a period whenever
he visited the village.
37. Further, due to the prohibited relationship, she was helpless and
was forced to act on the dictates of the appellant, where she went to the
extent of complaining that she was kidnapped by 1 known and 3 unknown
persons and raped. When she was taken for medical examination, even
though the victim came up with such a statement had contradicted and spelt
out the truth before the Doctor/PW9 which is recorded in Ex.P8 and Ex.P10.
In the absence of any evidence regarding rape and recent sexual relationship,
as per PW9, medical opinion/ Ex.P10 and the explanation of PW1 coupled
with the evidence of PW4, the discrepancy regarding kidnap and rape, does
not in any way affect the prosecution case. This court cannot be oblivious of
the fact that the minor victim was under fear of shame in the family and
21/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
society apart from the trauma she had undergone, which made her to act as
per the instructions of the accused.
38. The testimony of the victim is reliable, trustworthy and inspires
the confidence of this court regarding the sexual assault committed by the
accused. PW1 had been consistent and given clear and cogent evidence
regarding the sexual intercourse had by the accused on several occasion
from her studying in 9th std and 10th std. In fact, PW1 had withstood the rigor
of cross-examination and defence was not able to elicit anything adverse to
the case of the prosecution. In the cases of this nature involving the sexual
assault on the minor that too in a prohibited relationship, the delay in
lodging the complaint cannot be taken a ground to discredit the prosecution
case and the contention of the appellant in this regard deserves to be
rejected.
39. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhanei Prasad alias
Raju v. State of Himachal Pradesh reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1636
dealing with the case where the father was convicted for the sexual assault
on the daughter had observed that the scars are not merely physical but
22/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
psychological, cutting across every fibre of trust, safety, and dignity. When
the perpetrator is none other the father, the natural guardian, the crime
assumes a demonic character. When person who is expected to be a shield
becomes the source of violation, the betrayal is not personal but institutional.
In such cases, there can be no mitigation in sentencing.
“13. When a father who is expected to be a shield, a guardian, a
moral compass, becomes the source of the most severe violation of a
child’s bodily integrity and dignity, the betrayal is not only personal but
institutional. The law does not, and cannot, condone such acts under the
guise of rehabilitation or reform. Incestuous sexual violence committed by
a parent is a distinct category of offence that tears through the
foundational fabric of familial trust and must invite the severest
condemnation in both language and sentence. The home, which should be
a sanctuary, cannot be permitted to become a site of unspeakable trauma,
and the courts must send a clear signal that such offences will be met with
an equally unsparing judicial response. To entertain a plea for leniency in
a case of this nature would not merely be misplaced, it would constitute a
betrayal of the Court’s own constitutional duty to protect the vulnerable.
When a child is forced to suffer at the hands of her own father, the law
must speak in a voice that is resolute and uncompromising. There can be
no mitigation in sentencing for crimes that subvert the very notion of
family as a space of security.”
23/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
40. The trial court, on considering the evidences, concluded that the
victim was subjected to aggravated penetrative sexual assault and previous
enmity projected by the defence as a motive to lodge false complaint, is not
subjective to discredit the prosecution case, had convicted and imposed the
statutory minimum sentence.
41. The decisions relied on by the appellant does not support the
facts and circumstances of the present case. In the decision in Santosh
Prasad, it was was case of rape and the Hon’ble Supreme Court on finding
that there was previous enmity and the medical evidence did not support the
charge of rape, disbelieved the case of prosecution and acquitted the
accused. In the case of Chellappan, the Division bench of this Court finding
that there were several contradictions in the evidence and finding that the
hymen was intact disbelieved the allegation of sexual assault and acquitted
the accused. In the other decisions relied also, this court disbelieved the
prosecution case as the victims testimony was not consistent and supported
by any substantial evidence.
24/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
42. This Court, on reappraisal of the entire evidences and
arguments raised in this appeal, does not find any illegality or perversity in
the findings arrived at by the trial court warranting interference.
43. Accordingly, Criminal Appeal stands dismissed. The trial Court
shall take steps to secure the accused and commit him to prison to undergo
the remaining period of sentence.
12.03.2026
Speaking order
Index : Yes
Neutral Citation : Yes
sri
To
1.The Sessions Judge,
Fast Track Mahila Court, Dharmapuri.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Pennagaram All Women Police Station,
Dharmapuri District.
3.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
25/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.
sri
Pre-Delivery Judgment made in
Crl.A.No.374 of 2022
12.03.2026
26/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/03/2026 08:13:23 pm )
