Sankar vs The Inspector of Police
- Court
- Madras High Court
CRL A(MD) No. 591 of 2019
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
RESERVED ON : 25-09-2026
PRONOUNCED ON : 27-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.KARTHIKEYAN
CRL A(MD) No. 591 of 2019
CNR:{HCMD011170392019}
Sankar
...Appellant/Sole Accused
Vs
The State, Rep by,
The Inspector of Police,
Pattukkottai Taluk Police Station,
Thanjavur District.
(Crime No. 313 of 2013)
..Respondent/Complainant
PRAYER: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C., to
call for the records in Special Sessions Case No. 11 of 2014 on the file of
the learned Sessions Judge, Mahalir Neethimandram (Fast Track Mahila
Court), Thanjavur, Thanjavur District and set aside the judgment dated
16.10.2019 and acquit the appellant of the charges levelled against
against him.
For Appellant : Mr. A.Thiruvadi Kumar.
For Respondent : Mr. A.Robinson,
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
*
__________
Page 1 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 09:58:41 am )
CRL A(MD) No. 591 of 2019
JUDGMENT
This Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment of
conviction passed against the appellant herein by the Fast Track Mahila
Court, Thanjavur in Spl. S.C.No.11 of 2014 dated 16.10.2019.
2. On a careful perusal of the records, it is found that on
11.11.2013, P.W.14 Muthulakshmi, the then Sub-Inspector of Police,
Pattukkottai Taluk Police Station, received Ex.P1 complaint statement
from P.W.1 and registered Ex.P7 First Information Report in Crime
No.313 of 2013 for the offences punishable under Section 4 of the
POCSO Act and Section 506(ii) of IPC. He forwarded the original
complaint and the First Information Report to the learned Judicial
Magistrate, Pattukkottai, and placed a copy of the First Information
Report before the Inspector of Police for investigation.
3. P.W.15 Sengamalakannan, the Deputy Superintendent of Police,
took up the investigation of the case. On the same day, he visited the
place of occurrence at about 13.45 hours and prepared Ex.P8 Observation
Mahazar and Ex.P9 Rough Sketch in the presence of witnesses P.W.5
Balakrishnan and P.W.6 Rajendiran. He examined P.W.1 Dhanalakshmi,
P.W.2 Muruganandham, P.W.3 Vedhavalli, Kokila, Kanagi, and P.W.4
Soodamani and recorded their statements. He also examined the mahazar
__________
Page 2 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 09:58:41 am )
CRL A(MD) No. 591 of 2019
witnesses and recorded their statements.
4 . On 11.11.2013, at about 15.00 hours, he arrested the Accused at
Aaladikumulai, Pattukkottai. At about 15.30 hours, he caused the
Accused to be remanded in judicial custody. On the same day, he
examined the Special Sub-Inspector of Police Gandhi, Women Police
Constable 176 Sivasankari, and forwarded the victim to the Government
Hospital, Pattukkottai, for medical examination.
5 . On 12.11.2013, he forwarded a requisition, through the Special
Sub-Inspector of Police, Rajendiran to the Government Hospital,
Pattukkottai, for conducting the potency test of the Accused. On
19.11.2013, he produced the victim before the Child Welfare Committee
through the Special Sub-Inspector of Police Gandhi. On 21.11.2013, he
recovered the Birth Certificate of the victim through the Sanitary
Inspector.
6 . On 31.12.2013, he examined the Special Sub-Inspector of Police
Rajendiran and recorded his statement. On the same day, he examined the
Special Sub-Inspector of Police Gandhi, Dr.Baskar, Women Police
Constable Sivasankari, Dr.Meena, Sub-Inspector of Police
Muthulakshmi, the Child Welfare Committee official Palaniappan and the
Sanitary Inspector Ravichandran and recorded their statements. On
__________
Page 3 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 09:58:41 am )
CRL A(MD) No. 591 of 2019
completion of the investigation, on 31.12.2013, he filed the final report
before the Special Court.
7. The final report was taken cognizance by the Special Court in
Spl.S.C.No.11 of 2014, and summons was issued to the Accused. On his
appearance, the copies of the documents relied upon by the prosecution
were furnished to him under Section 207 of Cr.P.C.
8 . After hearing both sides, the Trial Court has framed charges
against the Accused for the offences punishable under Section 4 of
POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 506(ii) of IPC. The charges were read
over and explained to the Accused, which he denied. Therefore, he was
tried before the trial court.
9 . To prove its case, the prosecution has examined P.W.1 to
P.W.15 and marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P9. After closure of the prosecution side
evidence, the incriminating materials appeared in the evidence were put
to the Accused under Section 313(1)(b) of Cr.P.C. He denied the same as
false. Though he claimed that he had witnesses to examine on his side, no
witness was examined and, therefore, the defence side evidence was also
closed.
10 . After hearing both sides, the Trial Court has found the
__________
Page 4 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 09:58:41 am )
CRL A(MD) No. 591 of 2019
appellant guilty of the offences punishable under Section 4 of POCSO
Act and Section 506(ii) of IPC and sentenced him as follows:
10(i). For the offence punishable under Section 4 of the POCSO
Act, to undergo ten years of imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-,
in default, to undergo one year simple imprisonment.
10(ii). For the offence punishable under Section 506(ii) of IPC, to
undergo one year imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default,
to undergo three months simple imprisonment. Both the sentences were
ordered to run concurrently.
11. Aggrieved by the said judgment of conviction and sentence, the
Accused has preferred the present appeal before this Court. Heard the
learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned Government
Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the State. The Trial Court records
have been called for and perused.
12. Point for Determination:
“Whether the conviction and sentence imposed on the
appellant is sustainable?”
__________
Page 5 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 09:58:41 am )
CRL A(MD) No. 591 of 2019
Answer:-
13. On a careful perusal of the records, it is found that it is the case
of the prosecution that the victim was below the age of 14 years and that
the appellant had committed penetrative sexual assault upon her. To
substantiate the said case, the prosecution examined P.W.1 to P.W.15 and
marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P9.
14. On a careful perusal of the records, it is found that the
prosecution has produced Ex.P2 Birth Certificate of the victim. As per
Ex.P2, the date of birth of the victim is 03.10.2001. The occurrence is
alleged to have taken place on 10.11.2013. Therefore, at the time of the
occurrence, the victim was a child within the meaning of the POCSO Act.
15. On careful perusal of records, it is found that the victim was
examined as PW1. PW1, in her evidence, deposed that on 10.11.2013, at
about 4.00 p.m., she had gone to play kabaddi at the backside of the
house of the appellant. She, along with her friends Dhanalakshmi, Kasturi
were playing kabaddi. At that time, the appellant also came there and
offered to play kabaddi. Along with the appellant, two or three other
persons were present. In all, there were five persons. They formed one
team, while the appellant and his friends formed the other team, and they
played kabaddi.
__________
Page 6 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 09:58:41 am )
CRL A(MD) No. 591 of 2019
16. P.W.1 further deposed that at about 5.45 p.m., she went to her
house to drink water and thereafter proceeded to answer nature's call.
While she was answering nature's call, the Accused gagged her mouth
with a hand kerchief and took her to his house. He locked her inside the
house. When she attempted to take the kerchief, the Accused pushed her
down and thereafter lying down on top of her. He removed her clothes,
lifted her inner skirt and pressed his private part into her private part. She
experienced pain and cried with pain and became unconscious. At that
time, the mother of the appellant came there, tapped on the door and
called out the appellant by name. Thereafter, the victim removed the
kerchief from her mouth and called out, “Aatha, Aatha” to his mother;
however, the same did not reach her ears.
17. P.W.1 further deposed that the appellant thereafter brought her
out of the house and threatened her that, if she disclosed this to anyone,
he would murder her sister and parents. He threw her clothes outside and
pushed her out of the house. She then heard the sound of her mother
coming in search of her. She went to her mother and informed her about
the occurrence and cried. Her mother asked the victim's paternal uncle to
enquire about the same with the parents of the appellant. However, they
closed the doors and they were not inclined to see them.
__________
Page 7 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 09:58:41 am )
CRL A(MD) No. 591 of 2019
18. P.W.1 further deposed that she was bleeding from her private
part and subsequently suffered from fever (somebody told them to save
the child). Her mother took her to a private hospital, where first aid was
given and they were advised to take her to the Government Hospital.
Since her elder and younger sisters were alone at home, her mother
brought her back home. On the next day, they went to the Government
Hospital, Pattukkottai. As there was no doctor available, at about 12.00 to
12.30 p.m., she went to the Pattukkottai Police Station [the witness stated
that she was not sure of the name of the police station] and lodged Ex.P1
complaint. Thereafter, a male police officer took her to the Government
Hospital, where a lady doctor examined her and applied medicine on the
injury. The police, having found that the occurrence was true, arrested the
Accused. P.W.1 further deposed that she had sustained a small nail-mark
injury below her right thumb and that she gave a statement before the
Woman Police Officer.
19. P.W.2 Muruganandham, the father of the victim has not
deposed anything about the occurrence. P.W.3/Vedhavalli, the mother of
the victim, is only a hearsay witness. She in her evidence deposed that,
about three and a half years prior, when she returned from the field, she
went in search of her daughter. At that time, she found her daughter
__________
Page 8 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 09:58:41 am )
CRL A(MD) No. 591 of 2019
coming out of the lane by weeping. She noticed bleeding from her private
part. When she questioned her, the victim informed her that the appellant
herein had pressed his male organ into her private part. She further stated
that she had gone to the house of the appellant and pleaded to save her
daughter. They closed the doors and did not open. Thereafter, she took
the victim to a private hospital at Pattukkottai, where they were advised
to admit her in the Government Hospital and to give a complaint before
the police. However, they thought that the matter could be settled through
the intervention of elders and, therefore, did not immediately lodge a
complaint. She also stated that, through the paternal uncle of the victim,
they pleaded with the father of the appellant to save her daughter, for
which he replied that they could do whatever they wanted.
20. Thereafter, they took the victim to the Government Hospital,
Pattukkottai. As there was no doctor, they went to the Police Station. The
police took the victim to the hospital. Thereafter, the Accused was
arrested.
21. P.W.4 Soodamani, the friend of the victim, turned hostile and
did not depose anything about the occurrence. PW5 Balakrishnan also did
not support the case of the prosecution. P.W.6 the then Special Sub-
Inspector of Police, Pattukkottai Taluk Police Station, took the appellant
__________
Page 9 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 09:58:41 am )
CRL A(MD) No. 591 of 2019
to the Government Hospital, Pattukkottai, for medical examination on
11.11.2013. P.W.7 is the Special Sub-Inspector of Police, Pattukkottai
Taluk Police Station, who took the victim to the Government Hospital,
Pattukkottai, for medical examination. PW8 Rajendiran, did not support
the case of the prosecution and was treated as hostile.
22. P.W.10 is a member of the Child Welfare Committee. He, in
his evidence, deposed that, on 19.11.2013, the victim was produced
before the Child Welfare Committee by the Inspector of Police,
Pattukkottai. The victim was enquired and she narrated the occurrence.
Her statement ( Ex.P4 ) was recorded by one of the members, Nishkath
Apsha. He thereafter forwarded Ex.P3 report to the Inspector of Police.
23. PW11 Dr.Meena, who conducted the medical examination of
the victim, deposed that, on 11.11.2013, at about 6.00 p.m., the victim
was produced before her for medical examination. The victim stated that,
on 10.11.2013, at about 6.00 p.m., while she was playing near the house
of a person aged about 27 years, the said person took her to his house,
laid her down and touched her private part and harassed her.
24. On examination, PW11 found the victim was aged about 13
years. The secondary sexual organs had not developed. She had sustained
a small abrasion on her right thumb and no other external injuries were
__________
Page 10 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 09:58:41 am )
CRL A(MD) No. 591 of 2019
found. On examination of the private part, she found no hair growth and
no external injuries. The vagina admitted one finger. She took a vaginal
swab and forwarded the same to the Forensic Science Laboratory. The
report revealed that neither semen nor spermatozoa was detected in the
swab. PW11 opined that, as the vagina admitted one finger, the victim
might have been subjected to sexual harassment. Ex.P5 is the Accident
Register.
25. P.W.12 Dr. Baskaran, the doctor who conducted the medical
examination of the Accused, deposed that, on examination, he found that
there was nothing to suggest that the appellant is impotent. In this
connection, he issued Ex.P6 Medical Certificate.
26. P.W.13 is the police official who produced the victim before
the Government Hospital, Pattukkottai, for medical examination. P.W.14
Muthulakshmi, the then Sub-Inspector of Police, Pattukkottai Taluk
Police Station, recorded Ex.P1 complaint of the victim and registered
Ex.P7 First Information Report.
27. PW15 Sengamalakannan is the Investigating Officer. He
deposed with regard to the investigation conducted by him, preparation of
the Observation Mahazar and Rough Sketch, examination of witnesses,
arrest of the Accused, production of the Accused and the victim for
__________
Page 11 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 09:58:41 am )
CRL A(MD) No. 591 of 2019
medical examination, collection of the birth certificate of the victim and
filing of the final report before the Trial Court.
28. On a careful perusal of the evidence of the prosecution
witnesses, it is found that, insofar as the occurrence is concerned, except
the evidence of the victim, no other direct evidence is available on record.
The evidence of P.W.3, the mother of the victim, is res gestae with regard
to the occurrence and does not constitute direct evidence as regards the
occurrence.
29. In her evidence, P.W.1 has stated that, while she was answering
nature's call, the Accused gagged her mouth with a kerchief, took her to
his house, committed penetrative sexual assault upon her and thereafter
threw her out of the house along with her clothes on the date of
occurrence.
30. It is the case of the victim that she was profusely bleeding from
her private part, which was noticed by her mother, who questioned her
about the same. She further stated that thereafter they went to the house
of the Accused and tapped on the doors, seeking justice. P.W.1 and her
mother also claimed that they thereafter went to a private hospital and
obtained treatment. However, the prosecution has not produced any
medical records to prove the treatment allegedly taken at the private
__________
Page 12 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 09:58:41 am )
CRL A(MD) No. 591 of 2019
hospital.
31. Further, PW1 claimed that on the next day, they went to the
Government Hospital, Pattukkottai, where no doctor was available, and
thereafter Ex.P1 complaint came to be lodged before the police. On
careful perusal of Ex.P1 complaint, it is found that the victim has not
stated in her complaint that she was bleeding from her private part.
Instead, she stated that she found a white, viscous fluid on her private
part. Therefore, the evidence of PW1 and her mother that the victim was
profusely bleeding from her private part after the occurrence is nothing
but an exaggeration, which was not supported by Ex.P1 complaint.
32. Further, the said statement of the victim regarding bleeding
from her private part is not supported by the medical evidence also.
Though the victim and her mother claimed that she was taken to a private
hospital for treatment, no records relating to such treatment have been
produced by the prosecution.
33. PW11 Dr.Meena, in her evidence, has clearly deposed that she
did not find any injury on the body of the victim except a small abrasion
over the right thumb. Even according to the victim, she had been playing
kabaddi before the occurrence. Therefore, the said injury could also have
__________
Page 13 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 09:58:41 am )
CRL A(MD) No. 591 of 2019
been sustained during the game of kabaddi.
34. It is also curious to note that the doctor has not deposed
anything with regard to rupture of the hymen. She deposed that a vaginal
swab was taken and forwarded to the Forensic Science Laboratory. The
Forensic Science Laboratory report discloses that no semen or
spermatozoa was detected in the said swab. Therefore, the statement of
the victim in Ex.P1 complaint that she found a white, viscous fluid on her
private part is also not corroborated by the lab report.
35. Though the occurrence is said to have taken place on
10.11.2013 at about 5.45 p.m., the complaint came to be lodged only on
11.11.2013 at about 13.00 hours. The First Information Report reached
the Court only on 11.11.2013 at about 9.00 p.m. Therefore, the possibility
of improvement, exaggeration and embellishment cannot be completely
ruled out.
36. Further, P.W.1, in her cross-examination, has admitted that,
after they went to the private hospital, the doctor advised them to
approach the Police Station. However, they did not immediately go to the
Police Station, though it was situate very near to the said hospital. She
has also admitted that she did not go to the Government Hospital on the
__________
Page 14 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 09:58:41 am )
CRL A(MD) No. 591 of 2019
same night.
37. The defence has also elicited certain contradictions in the
evidence of P.W.1 and her complaint statement, Ex.P1. In Ex.P1, the
victim has not stated that the appellant gagged her mouth with a kerchief
and took her to his house. According to her statement, she was taken to
the house of the Accused, laid on the ground and thereafter she became
unconscious. She regained consciousness only when the mother of the
appellant came there.
38. Therefore, on a careful consideration of the evidence of the
victim, it is found that it is not corroborated by her own statement, Ex.P1.
Further, the statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. of the victim was not
recorded. In view of the contradictions found in the evidence of the
victim, including on material particulars, this Court is of the considered
view that it would be highly hazardous to sustain the conviction on the
basis of her uncorroborated testimony. Therefore, this court is of the
considered view that the benefit of doubts expressed above need to be
extended to the appellant and he shall be acquitted from the charges
framed against him.
39. In the result, this Criminal Appeal is allowed. The conviction
__________
Page 15 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 09:58:41 am )
CRL A(MD) No. 591 of 2019
and sentence passed by the Trial Court in Spl. S.C.No.11 of 2014 dated
16.10.2019 is hereby set aside. The bail bond executed by the appellant
shall stand discharged. The fine amount, if any paid, shall be refunded to
the appellant.
27-10-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
jja
__________
Page 16 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 09:58:41 am )
CRL A(MD) No. 591 of 2019
To:-
1. The learned Sessions Judge,
Mahalir Neethimandram (Fast Track Mahila Court),
Thanjavur,
Thanjavur District.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Pattukkottai Taluk Police Station,
Thanjavur District.
3. The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
__________
Page 17 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 09:58:41 am )
CRL A(MD) No. 591 of 2019
S.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
jja
CRL A(MD) No. 591 of 2019
27-10-2026
__________
Page 18 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 09:58:41 am )