Saravanan vs The State of Tamilnadu

Court
Madras High Court

Crl.A(MD) No.1125 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 10-11-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.LINGESWARAN
Crl.A(MD) No.1125 of 2024
and
Crl.M.P(MD)No.10335 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD015392092024}
Saravanan
..Appellant
Vs
The State of Tamilnadu
Rep by the Inspector of Police,
Theni Police Station,
Theni District.
Crime No.327 of 2023. ..Respondent
PRAYER: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 415(2) of BNSS, to call
for the records relating to the judgment in Spl.S.C.No.161 of 2023 dated
08.11.2024 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive
Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Theni and set aside the same and allow
this Criminal Appeal.
For Appellant :Mr.A.Tlhiruvadi Kumar
for Mr.A.Balaji
For Respondent :Mr.A.Robinson
Additional Public Prosecutor
__________
Page  1  of  12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:37:24 pm )

Crl.A(MD) No.1125 of 2024
JUDGMENT
This Criminal Appeal has been filed to set aside the judgment dated
08.11.2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for
Exclusive Trial of Cases under the POCSO Act, Theni, in Spl.S.C.No.161
of 2023.
2. The Case
(i) The case of the prosecution is that on 07.07.2023 at about 12.20
a.m., the appellant asked his 15-year-old daughter to apply pain balm as
he was suffering from a headache. It is alleged that he then sexually
assaulted her and that, a few hours later, he attempted to assault her again,
but the other daughter intervened and saved her. The mother of the child
lodged a First Information (Ex.P7), on which a case in Cr.No.327 of 2023
was registered by the respondent Police against the appellant under
Sections 9(n), 10 of the POCSO Act and Section 506(i) of the IPC.
(ii) The case was investigated, witnesses were examined, evidence
was collected, and a final report was filed before the Special Court under
the POCSO Act. The trial Court furnished copies to the appellant under
__________
Page  2  of  12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:37:24 pm )

Crl.A(MD) No.1125 of 2024
Section 207 of the Cr.P.C., heard both sides, and framed charges under
Section 10 of the POCSO Act and Section 506(i) of the IPC. The
appellant pleaded not guilty, and the trial proceeded.
(iii) The prosecution examined 15 witnesses and exhibited 9
documents. No material object was marked on either side. The defence
examined two witnesses. On a consideration of the entire evidence, the
trial Court convicted the appellant under Section 10 of the POCSO Act,
2012 and sentenced him to undergo five years of Rigorous Imprisonment
and a fine of Rs.10,000/-, with a default sentence.
(iv) The trial Court acquitted the appellant of the charge under
Section 506(i) of the IPC. It also directed payment of Rs.3,00,000/- as
compensation to the survivor, which was paid by the State. Aggrieved by
the conviction and sentence, the appellant has preferred this appeal.
3. Submissions
(i) The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the
prosecution case is supported only by the evidence of the survivor
__________
Page  3  of  12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:37:24 pm )

Crl.A(MD) No.1125 of 2024
(P.W.2), and that her evidence is unreliable because, owing to a property
dispute, she had given false evidence against her own father.
(ii) In support, the learned counsel relied on the evidence of P.W.3,
who stated that the survivor and her younger brother were staying with
her in one room while the appellant was in another room. P.W.3 said
nothing about the alleged occurrence.
(iii) The learned counsel further relied on the following:
(a) P.W.3 is stated to have written the complaint on 07.07.2023;
(b) the survivor stated in cross-examination that, after a quarrel with
her mother, the mother took all the children to her grandmother’s house at
Periyakulam as early as 30.06.2023; and
(c) the survivor’s grandmother (P.W.4) also stated in cross-
examination that, after a quarrel, the wife of the appellant took the
children to her house.
(iv) The learned counsel also filed an affidavit of the survivor stating
that a false complaint had been lodged against the appellant by exploiting
__________
Page  4  of  12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:37:24 pm )

Crl.A(MD) No.1125 of 2024
her innocence. The survivor appeared before this Court, affirmed the
contents of the affidavit, and stated that she had been made to say in her
chief-examination before the Trial Court whatever she had said.
(v) The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the trial
Court had relied on the evidence of P.W.2 and convicted the appellant,
and that, if the evidence of the survivor is reliable, trustworthy and
inspires the confidence of the Court, a conviction can rest on her sole
testimony.
4. This Court has carefully considered the submissions of both sides.
5. Discussion and Findings
(i) The governing principles
(a) It is well settled that a conviction under the POCSO Act can be
based on the sole testimony of the child victim, without corroboration, if
that testimony is reliable, trustworthy and of sterling quality as held in the
following cases:
__________
Page  5  of  12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:37:24 pm )

Crl.A(MD) No.1125 of 2024
* Vijay alias Chinee v. State of Madhya Pradesh , (2010) 8 SCC 191;
* Krishan Kumar Malik v. State of Haryana , (2011 INSC 437) ; and
* Ganesan v. State , (2020) 10 SCC 573.
(b) In Rai Sandeep alias Deepu v. State (NCT of Delhi) , ((2012) 8
SCC 21), the Supreme Court explained that a “sterling witness” is one of
very high quality and calibre whose version is unassailable. The same
principle has been applied by the Supreme Court to set aside a conviction
under the POCSO Act where the version of the victim did not meet that
standard ( Nirmal Premkumar v. State , 2024 SCC OnLine SC 260).
(c) The corollary of this rule is equally important. Where the
prosecution case rests entirely on the solitary evidence of the victim, that
evidence must withstand close scrutiny, and if it is shown to be
inconsistent or doubtful, the Court cannot sustain a conviction on it. The
statutory presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act, 2012, does
not alter this position. The presumption arises only after the prosecution
has established the foundational facts, and it is rebuttable. The accused
rebuts it by raising a probable defence, which can be done by pointing to
infirmities in the prosecution evidence or by placing material on record.
__________
Page  6  of  12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:37:24 pm )

Crl.A(MD) No.1125 of 2024
The burden of proving the charge beyond reasonable doubt remains
throughout on the prosecution.
(ii) The evidence of the survivor (P.W.2)
(a) The case against the appellant rests solely on the evidence of
P.W.2. P.W.3, who was present in the house, did not speak of the
occurrence. The question is therefore whether the evidence of P.W.2
meets the standard described above.
(b) During cross-examination, P.W.2 stated that on 30.06.2023, after
a quarrel with her mother, her mother took all the children to her
grandmother’s house at Periyakulam. This is confirmed by the
grandmother (P.W.4), who stated in cross-examination that, after a
quarrel, the wife of the appellant took her daughters to her house. Two
witnesses, one of them the survivor herself, thus speak consistently of a
quarrel between the wife of the appellant and the appellant and of the
mother leaving with the children about a week before the alleged
occurrence of 07.07.2023.
__________
Page  7  of  12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:37:24 pm )

Crl.A(MD) No.1125 of 2024
(c) This evidence materially affects the case of the prosecution. First,
it shows that the relations between the spouses had broken down before
the complaint was made. Second, the complaint was lodged on
07.07.2023, only a week after the quarrel. Third, the prosecution has not
offered any explanation for this sequence of events, and nothing has been
pointed out to show that this evidence was shaken. If this evidence is
accepted, the circumstances in which the occurrence is said to have taken
place become doubtful, and the defence theory that the complaint arose
out of a domestic and property dispute becomes plausible.
(d) The defence theory is further strengthened by a subsequent
event. The Sale Deed in respect of the disputed property was later
executed. This lends support to the contention that the wife of the
appellant, owing to the property dispute, used the children to make a
false accusation against the appellant.
(iii) Subsequent events
(a) The survivor filed an affidavit before this Court, and appeared in
person and affirmed it. This Court has not taken that affidavit into
account, because it was not tested by cross-examination and is not
__________
Page  8  of  12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:37:24 pm )

Crl.A(MD) No.1125 of 2024
part of the trial record. The conclusion of this Court is based entirely
on the evidence recorded at the trial, namely the admissions elicited
in the cross-examination of P.W.2 and the corroborating evidence of
P.W.4.
(b) It is also on record that the survivor returned to the Social
Defence Department the compensation amount that had been paid to
her, and proof of the same has been filed before this Court. This is a
documentary fact and does not depend on her oral statement. It is not
by itself decisive of innocence of the appellant, and the Court does not
treat it as such. However, taken together with the infirmities in the
evidence of P.W.2, it reinforces the doubt created by the cross-
examination of P.W.2 and P.W.4.
6. Conclusion
The evidence of P.W.2 is the only evidence against the appellant.
The admissions in her cross-examination, supported by P.W.4, the
circumstances of the complaint, the subsequent Sale Deed and the
return of the compensation raise a serious doubt about the case of the
prosecution. A witness whose evidence is open to such doubt cannot be
__________
Page  9  of  12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:37:24 pm )

Crl.A(MD) No.1125 of 2024
regarded as a sterling witness, and a conviction cannot safely be rested
on her sole testimony. The appellant is entitled to the benefit of this
doubt. This Court is therefore unable to uphold the conviction and
sentence passed by the trial Court.
7. Result
(i) In the result, the judgment dated 08.11.2024 passed by the
learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under
the POCSO Act, Theni, in Spl.S.C. No.161 of 2023 is set aside, and the
appellant is acquitted of the charge under Section 10 of the POCSO Act.
(ii) Accordingly, this Criminal Appeal is allowed. Consequently, the
connected miscellaneous petition is closed. The fine amount already paid
is ordered to be refunded to the appellant.
10-11-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
rgm
__________
Page  10  of  12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:37:24 pm )

Crl.A(MD) No.1125 of 2024
To
1.The Superintendent of Prison,
Central Prison, Madurai.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Theni Police Station,
Theni District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
Madurai
Copy To:
Section Officer (VR Section)
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
__________
Page  11  of  12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:37:24 pm )

Crl.A(MD) No.1125 of 2024
D.LINGESWARAN, J.
rgm
Crl.A(MD) No.1125 of 2024
10-11-2026
__________
Page  12  of  12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 06:37:24 pm )