SREEKALA @ KALA vs STATE OF KERALA

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 1 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
TH
WEDNESDAY, THE 9 DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 / 18TH BHADRA, 1948
CRL.A NO. 2184 OF 2024
CRIME NO.1036/2017 OF Vilappilssala Police Station,
Thiruvananthapuram
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 18.10.2024 IN SC NO.1581 OF
2018 OF FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT, KATTAKADA
APPELLANTS/1ST ACCUSED:
SREEKALA @ KALA
AGED 47 YEARS
D/O.LEELA, RESIDING ON RENT AT THE HOUSE OF VALSALA
KUMARI, KUTTIKADU, MEPPOOKKADA, MALAYINKEEZHU DESOM,
MALAYINKEEZHU VILLAGE FROM SOUMYA BHAVAN,
PADINJAREKKARA, PERUVIKKONAM, KAVINPURAM,
THURUTHUMMOOLA, VILLAPIL VILLAGE.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695501
BY ADVS.
SHRI.SREEJITH S. NAIR
SRI.V.S.THOSHIN
SRI.SATHEESH MOHANAN
SMT.MAHIMA
SRI.AKHIL SUSEENDRAN
SHRI.SEKHAR G. THAMPI
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682031
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.K.SAJEEV
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
07.08.2026, ALONG WITH CRL.A.2444/2024 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON 09.09.2026 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 2 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
TH
WEDNESDAY, THE 9 DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 / 18TH BHADRA,
1948
CRL.A NO. 2444 OF 2024
CRIME NO.1036/2017 OF Vilappilssala Police Station,
Thiruvananthapuram
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 18.10.2024 IN SC NO.1581
OF 2018 OF FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT, KATTAKADA
APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.4:
RAMESH @ SUMESH
AGED 33 YEARS
S/O.JOB, RESIDING ON RENT AT THE HOUSE OF VALSALA
KUMARI, KUTTIKADU, MEPPOOKKADA, MALAYANKEEZHU
DESOM AND VILLAGE, FROM SURESH BHAVAN, NEAR
KURISSADI, MUNDELA, PUTHUKULANGARA, VELLANADU
VILLAGE,NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN -
695543
BY ADVS.
SMT.NIKITA NAIR C.S.
SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE
SRI.T.G.SUNIL (PERUMBAVOOR)
SRI.M.A.KASIM
SHRI.ALIF K.S.
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT (STATE):
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN – 682031
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.K.SAJEEV
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
07.08.2026
ALONG WITH CRL.A.2184/2024 AND CONNECTED CASES,
THE COURT ON 09.09.2026, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 3 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
TH
WEDNESDAY, THE 9 DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 / 18TH BHADRA,
1948
CRL.A NO. 2451 OF 2024
CRIME NO.1036/2017 OF Vilappilssala Police Station,
Thiruvananthapuram
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 18.10.2024 IN SC NO.1581
OF 2018 OF FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT, KATTAKADA
APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.2:
SHAHIDHA BEEVI @ SHYNISHA @SHYNI
AGED 52 YEARS
D/O.BEEMA BEEVI, SAYOOJYA BHAVAN, IKKARAVILA,
NEMOM P O, PIN - 695020
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.A.SHIHAB
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
07.08.2026, ALONG WITH CRL.A.2184/2024 AND CONNECTED CASES,
THE COURT ON 09.09.2026, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 4 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
TH
WEDNESDAY, THE 9 DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 / 18TH BHADRA,
1948
CRL.A NO. 42 OF 2025
CRIME NO.1036/2017 OF Vilappilssala Police Station,
Thiruvananthapuram
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 18.10.2024 IN SC NO.1581
OF 2018 OF FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT, KATTAKADA
APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.3:
XXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.P.SUJESH KUMAR
BIJUKUMAR K.
RESPONDENT/STATE:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.K.SAJEEV
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
07.08.2026, ALONG WITH CRL.A.2184/2024 AND CONNECTED CASES,
THE COURT ON 09.09.2026 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 5 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
CR
COMMON JUDGMENT
th
Dated this the 09 day of September, 2026
These are appeals at the instance of accused Nos.1 to 4 in
S.C.No.1581/2018 on the files of the Fast Track Special Court,
Kattakkada, challenging the judgment dated 18.10.2024 in the
said case.
2 . Heard the learned State Brief Adv.Dhanalakshmi
nd
V.K. appearing for the appellant/2 accused in
Crl.A.No.2451/2024, the learned counsel for the appellants in
the other appeals, and the learned Public Prosecutor appearing
for the State of Kerala, in detail. Perused the verdict impugned
along with the records of the Special Court.
3. Here, the prosecution alleges commission of offences
punishable under Sections 366A, 376(1) and 376D r/w 34 of the
Indian Penal Code (for short, ‘the IPC’ hereinafter) and under

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 6 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
Sections 4 r/w 3(a), 6 r/w 5(g) and 5(j)(ii) and 17 r/w 16 of the
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for
short, ‘the PoCSO Act’ hereinafter), and under Section 3(2)(v) of
the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, ‘the SC/ST Act’ hereinafter), by
the accused persons.
4. The p rosecution case in brief is that with the
intention of committing penetrative sexual assault and rape on
the female child, who belonged to Scheduled Caste community,
and in furtherance of the common intention of the accused
persons, who did not belong to either Scheduled Caste or
Scheduled Tribe, to earn money by presenting her to different
persons, on one day before 25.12.2015, at about 8.00 a.m., at
the north-western bedroom of Soumya Bhavan, bearing No.VP-
IX/478, near Kavinpuram - Peruvikkonam Road, Vilappil
th
Village, the 4 accused committed rape and penetrative sexual
st
assault on the child with the assistance of the 1 accused.

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 7 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
Thereafter, on several days from 2016 onwards, during the
daytime, at Melepoithalavilakom House, bearing
No.MP-VII/28, Kuttikkadu, near Kuttikkadu–Kariyamcode
Road, Poongodu, Meppukkada Desom, Malayinkeezhu Village,
th
the 4 accused committed rape and penetrative sexual assault
st rd
on her in the presence of the 1 accused. In 2016, the 3 accused
took her in an autorickshaw bearing registration No. KL-01-
AW-5998 to House No.MP-III/376 at Vishnupuram, near the
road from Malayinkeezhu towards Manchadi, Malayinkeezhu
nd st
Village, where the 2 accused, a friend of the 1 accused, was
residing. At the northern-side bedroom of the said house, four
nd
identifiable persons, who were acquainted with the 2 accused,
committed rape and penetrative sexual assault on her in the
nd
presence of the 2 accused. Thereafter, on one day in February
2017, during the daytime, in the same house, in the presence of
nd
the 2 accused, four identifiable persons committed rape and
rd
penetrative sexual assault on her. On another day, the 3

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 8 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
accused took her in the same autorickshaw to Payarathalamele
Puthen Veedu, bearing House No.MP-IX/65, near ESSAR Petrol
Pump, Blocknada Junction, Malayinkeezhu - Ooruttambalam
Road, Malayinkeezhu Village. At about 12 noon, at the
rd
northern-side bedroom of the said house, the 3 accused
committed rape and penetrative sexual assault on her. On this
premise, the prosecution alleges commission of the above
offences, by the accused persons.
5. The learned Special Judge took cognizance of the
matter and proceeded with the trial. During trial, PW1 to PW36
were examined and Exts.P1 to P58 as well as MO1 to MO13 were
marked on the side of prosecution. No defence evidence was
adduced.
6. On evaluation of the evidence, the learned Special
Judge found that the appellants/accused Nos.1 to 4 committed
offences punishable under Sections 366A, 376(1) and 376D r/w
34 of the IPC and under Sections 4 r/w 3(a), 6 r/w 5(g) and 17

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 9 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
r/w 16 of the PoCSO Act, and accordingly, they were sentenced
as under:
“In the result:-
(i) The accused persons are sentenced to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for a term of 5 (Five) years
each and to pay a fine of ₹10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand only) each and in default of payment of
fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a
further term of 5 (Five) months each for the
offence punishable under sections 366A r/w 34 of
IPC.
(ii) The accused persons are sentenced to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for a term of 25 (Twenty
five) years each and to pay a fine of 90,000/-
(Rupees Ninety Thousand only) each and in default
of payment of fine to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for a further term of 1 (one) year
each for the offence punishable under sections 6
r/w 5(g) and 17 r/w 16 of the POCSO Act.
(iii) By virtue of section 42 of the PoCSO Act, no
separate sentence is imposed for the offences
punishable under sections 376(1), 376-D r/w 34 of
IPC.

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 10 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
(iv) In view of section 71 of IPC, no separate sentence is
imposed for the offences punishable under sections
4 r/w 3(a) and 17 r/w 16 of the POCSO Act.
(v) Substantive sentences shall run concurrently.
(vi) The accused persons are entitled to get set off for
the period of detention they had undergone in this
st
case, ie, from 08.08.2017 to 14.11.2017 for the 1
accused, from 08.08.2017 tο 09.11.2017 for the 2nd
accused, from 08.08.2017 to 08.11.2017 for the 3rd
accused and from 08.08.2017 to 13.11.2017 for the
4th accused.
(vii) On realising the fine amount, the entire amount
shall be paid to the survivor (PW1), u/s.357(1)(b) of
Cr.P.C., on account of the physical and mental
agony suffered by her in this case.
(viii) Since PW1 has suffered severe mental trauma due
to the incident in this case and the fine amount is
not adequate for the rehabilitation of PW1, by
invoking the power under section 357A of Cr.P.C.,
under section 33(8) of the POCSO Act and under
rule 9 (2) of the POCSO Rules, 2020, it is
recommended to the District Legal Services
Authority, Thiruvananthapuram to compensate
PW1, adequately.

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 11 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
(ix) Bail bonds executed by all the accused persons
stand cancelled and they shall be taken into custody
forthwith.”
7. The main contention raised by the learned counsel
rd
for the 3 accused is that only one occurrence was spoken by
PW1 as regards to penetrative sexual assault allegedly
rd
committed by the 3 accused and the said occurrence took place
at the house of PW12. When PW12 was examined, she turned
hostile to the prosecution and did not support the prosecution
case regarding any type of sexual molestation alleged by the
prosecution. Therefore, the evidence of PW1 as to commission
rd
of penetrative sexual assault by the 3 accused, against PW1,
could not be believed. Further, the evidence of PW1 is not of
sterling quality.
8. The learned counsel for accused Nos.1 and 4 argued
that, in the instant case, in fact, Crime No.1010/2017 was
registered first, based on the statement given by PW1, the victim

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 12 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
herein, alleging commission of sexual molestation by one
Vishnu Sagar, who maintained a relationship with her. At the
time of giving statement, she did not speak anything against the
accused persons initially, but in a subsequent statement, she
disclosed the occurrence, as alleged by the prosecution against
the accused persons. According to him, the instant case, in fact,
st
is a retaliatory measure at instance of PW1, since the 1 accused
informed the illicit relationship between PW1 and Vishnu Sagar
to her mother. The learned counsel also submitted that the
evidence of PW1 is not of sterling quality and the same is not
wholly reliable to act upon. Therefore, the learned counsel
pressed for interference in the verdict impugned.
9. The learned State Brief appearing for the
nd
appellant/2 accused in Crl.A.No.2451/2024 zealously argued
nd
that, as far as the 2 accused is concerned, (who is a lady), the
allegation mainly against her is abetment of the crime done by
accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 with the aid of Section 17 r/w 18 of the

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 13 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
PoCSO Act. According to the learned State Brief, in order to
prove the status of PW1 as a child, the prosecution has to
establish the same by convincing evidence. In the instant case,
age of the victim not properly proved, even though PW19 was
examined and Ext.P8 School Admission Register to show her
status as a child during the period of occurrence, was let in
evidence. It is also submitted that even though the prosecution
nd st
allegation is that the 2 accused was the friend of the 1
accused, in fact, no convincing evidence forthcoming to
substantiate the same. Therefore, the prosecution miserably
nd
failed to prove the allegation levelled against the 2 accused. As
such, the finding entered by the learned Special Judge as
nd
against the 2 accused would require interference.
10. All the learned counsel argued in particular that the
prosecution failed to establish the authenticity of the places of
occurrence in a convincing manner and that the prosecution
case was riddled with reasonable doubts. Therefore, the

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 14 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
appellants are entitled to benefit of doubts, and the impugned
verdict is liable to be set aside giving benefit of doubt to the
appellants.
11. The learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed
the contentions and submitted that the prosecution mainly
relied on the evidence of PW1, which is supported by the
evidence of PW2 and the other witnesses. He further submitted
that the hostility of PW12 with regard to the commission of rape
rd
by the 3 accused at her house would not, by itself, render the
evidence of PW1, unbelievable which was otherwise wholly
reliable, to prove the acts of sexual molestation levelled against
rd
the 3 accused. He submitted further that other contentions
raised by the appellants/accused, also bereft of merits.
Therefore, he pressed for confirmation of the impugned verdict.
12. Adverting to the rival arguments, the points arise
for consideration are;
(i) Whether the Special Court is right in

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 15 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
holding that accused Nos.1 to 4 committed offence
punishable under Section 366A r/w 34 of the IPC?
(ii) Whether the Special Court is justified in
holding that accused Nos.1 to 4 committed offence
punishable under Section 376(1) r/w 34 of the IPC?
(iii) Whether the Special Court is justified in
holding that accused Nos.1 to 4 committed offence
punishable under Section 376D r/w 34 of the IPC?
(iv) Whether the Special Court is justified in
holding that accused Nos.1 to 4 committed offence
punishable under Section 4 r/w 3(a) of the PoCSO
Act?
(v) Whether the Special Court is right in
holding that accused Nos.1 to 4 committed offence
punishable 6 r/w 5(g) of the PoCSO Act?
(vi) Whether the Special Court is right in
holding that accused Nos.1 to 4 committed offence

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 16 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
punishable under Section 17 r/w 16 of the PoCSO
Act?
(vii) Whether the verdict would require interference?
(viii) The order to be passed?
Point Nos.(i) to (viii)
13. In this case, the prosecution case is that with the
intention of committing penetrative sexual assault and rape on
the female child, who belonged to Scheduled Caste community,
and in furtherance of the said common intention of the accused
persons, who did not belong to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled
Tribe, to earn money by presenting her to different persons, one
day before 25.12.2015, at about 8.00 a.m., at the north-western
bedroom of Soumya Bhavan, bearing No. VP-IX/478, near
th
Kavinpuram - Peruvikkonam Road, Vilappil Village, the 4
accused committed rape and penetrative sexual assault on the
st
child with the assistance of the 1 accused. Thereafter, on

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 17 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
several days from 2016 onwards, during the daytime, at
Melepoithalavilakom House, bearing No. MP-VII/28,
Kuttikkadu, near Kuttikkadu–Kariyamcode Road, Poongodu,
th
Meppukkada Desom, Malayinkeezhu Village, the 4 accused
committed rape and penetrative sexual assault on her in the
st rd
presence of the 1 accused. In 2016, the 3 accused took her in
an autorickshaw bearing registration No.KL-01-AW-5998 to
House No.MP-III/376 at Vishnupuram, near the road from
Malayinkeezhu towards Manchadi, Malayinkeezhu Village,
nd st
where the 2 accused, a friend of the 1 accused, was residing.
At the northern-side bedroom of the said house, four
nd
identifiable persons, who were acquainted with the 2 accused,
committed rape and penetrative sexual assault on her in the
nd
presence of the 2 accused. Thereafter, on one day in February
2017, during the daytime, at the aforesaid house, in the
nd
presence of the 2 accused, four identifiable persons committed
rape and penetrative sexual assault on her. On another day, the

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 18 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
rd
3 accused took her in the aforesaid autorickshaw to
Payarathalamele Puthen Veedu, bearing House No. MP-IX/65,
near ESSAR Petrol Pump, Blocknada Junction, Malayinkeezhu -
Ooruttambalam Road, Malayinkeezhu Village. At about 12
rd
noon, at the northern-side bedroom of the said house, the 3
accused committed rape and penetrative sexual assault on her.
14. In order to establish the prosecution case, the victim
was examined as PW1. According to her, in 2017, she went for
employment at a tea shop near her residence at Vilappilsala
th
Kavinkoottam. She studied up to the 7 standard at St.Xavier’s
School, Pallimukku, and resided with her mother, grandmother,
grandfather, two brothers and a sister. According to her, her
father passed away 23 years earlier. She was forced to take up
employment at the tea shop as her mother was ailing and the
family faced difficulty even in procuring sufficient food. She also
deposed that she went to nearby houses and textile shops
seeking employment and that she belonged to the Hindu Pulaya

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 19 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
community. She gave Ext.P1 statement before the Women Sub-
Inspector of Police, Nedumangad, at the office of the DySP,
Nedumangad. PW1 further deposed that, in 2016, on several
st
occasions, the 1 accused took her in an autorickshaw to her
th
rented house at Kuttikkadu, Meppukada, where the 4 accused
st
was present. According to her, the 1 accused invited strangers
to the house and offered her to them, and they sexually
assaulted her. She further deposed that, on such occasions, the
th
4 accused also sexually assaulted her and that, thereafter, the
rd
3 accused took her to the house at Chappath. PW1 also
st
deposed that the 1 accused taken PW1 to the rental house of
nd
the 2 accused and therein, she was subjected to repeated
sexual intercourse by 4 to 5 persons. Again, PW1 deposed that
nd
the 2 accused brought her in an autorickshaw to a place near
the temple at Kudumankadavu, where she found a 40-year-old
man wearing a light-coloured shirt and a blue-coloured dhoti.
nd
He had given money to the 2 accused, who, in turn, directed

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 20 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
her to go with him. The said person then took her to a lodge in
Nedumangad, where he committed sexual intercourse with her
and thereafter invited other persons to engage in sexual acts
with her. Accordingly, she ran away from the lodge and reached
her aunt’s house. In her statement under Section 164 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure also, PW1 stated about the repeated
penetrative sexual assault. According to PW1, after the aforesaid
incidents, while she resided with her aunt at Kavinpuram, she
felt tired and began to vomit. She went to Nirthalayam Hospital,
i.e., Government Ayurveda College Hospital for Women and
Children, Poojappura, Thiruvananthapuram (Ayurveda and
Allopathy). During the medical examination, it was found that
she had pus cells in her urine. She experienced difficulty and
pain in her abdomen. Thereafter, she went to her mother's
house and resided there. An ASHA Worker named Sunitha
her house. Suspecting pregnancy, the said
resided near
ASHA Worker conducted a card

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 21 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
test, which revealed that PW1 was pregnant. Since her mother
did not believe the same, she was taken to a private hospital at
Kattakada, where her pregnancy was confirmed. Her mother
questioned her regarding the paternity of the child. At the same
time, accused Nos.1 to 3 threatened her with dire consequences
in the event of disclosure of the incidents to anyone. Earlier, she
lodged a case as Vilappilsala Police Station Crime No.1010/2017
against one Vishnu Sagar @ Kannan. She was in love with him.
When she became pregnant, accused Nos.1 and 2 required her
to state that the said Vishnu Sagar was responsible for her
pregnancy. They threatened to kill her if she did not lodge such
a case. During cross-examination by the 1st accused, PW1
admitted that she gave statements before the doctor and the
learned Magistrate that she was in love with Vishnu Sagar and
that he took her to his house and assaulted her. She also gave a
statement to the doctor that she had a sexual relationship with
the said Vishnu Sagar and that they last engaged in sexual

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 22 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
intercourse before the ‘Attukal Ponkala’. In the present case,
after giving Ext.P1 F.I. Statement regarding the incident at the
office of the DySP, Nedumangad, she identified the photographs
of all four accused persons. Before the Court, she identified MO1
th
to MO3 as the full-sleeved shirts of the 4 accused and MO4 as
his black pants. She also identified MO5 as the DVD player and
MO6 series, consisting of five CDs, as the CDs recovered by the
police. She further identified MO7 as the bed cover recovered
th
from the bedroom of A1 and A4. According to her, the 4
accused committed rape on her while MO7 was spread over the
bed.
15. The prosecution examined PW3 and PW10 to prove
the circumstances relating to the residence and movements of
PW1 and her acquaintance with the accused. PW3 deposed that
PW1 was the daughter of her elder sister. In 2017, PW2 resided
at the Housing Colony at Kavinpuram. According to her, she
came to know about the incident from PW1. During cross-

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 23 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
examination, PW3 deposed that, while PW1 was residing with
st
her, the 1 accused came to Chappath Junction and sent PW1 in
an autorickshaw, stating that she was being sent for a job. At the
same time, she admitted that she did not inform the police
about the said incident.
16. PW10 deposed that PW1 was his younger sister.
According to him, she worked at a textile shop at Peyad and at a
tea shop at Kavinpuram. As she was late in attending the textile
shop, she was sent out from there. His grandmother resided at
st
Kavinpuram and his aunt resided at Nooliyodu. The 1 accused,
who was one of his relatives, used to take PW1 from his house
periodically. PW1 resided at Kavinpuram and used to return at
about 9.00 p.m. It was stated that she had work until that time.
However, he turned hostile to the prosecution and deposed that
he did not give any statement to the police to the effect that, in
st
2015, the 1 accused took PW1 to her house at Kavinpuram,
th
where the 4 accused, who resided with her as her husband,

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 24 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
sexually assaulted PW1.
17. The evidence of PW4 assumes significance to the
circumstances surrounding the presence of the accused and
others at the place of occurrence and the police proceedings at
the said place. PW4 deposed that he was a cable technician with
Star Vision in 2018 and that he went to Kuttikadu, Mini Estate
Road, Meppukada, to repair a cable connected to the electric
posts. While he was doing his work, he saw the local people and
the accused gathered there. The police asked him to disclose his
name and address. He furnished the details and left the place.
When he enquired about the matter with the police, he came to
know that he was cited as a witness to the incident that took
place there. He admitted that he witnessed the incident in
st
which the 1 accused was taken away by the police. He also
admitted that he gave the cable connection to the house of the
st
1 accused. However, he turned hostile to the prosecution and
deposed that he did not give any statement to the police to the

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 25 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
effect that he saw a young man residing in the house of the 1st
accused and a young girl also present in the said house. He
further denied the suggestion of the prosecution that he knew
that a girl was sexually assaulted in the house.
18. PWs 5 and 6 were examined by the prosecution to
st
establish the residence of the 1 accused in the rented house at
Meppukada and the circumstances surrounding the police visit
to the said house. PW5 testified that, he had resided near the
house of one Valsala at Meppukada, Malayinkeezhu. In 2018,
st
Valsala rented out the building to the 1 accused. He came to
know that the police reached the said house and that the 1st
accused was an accused in a case relating to the sexual assault of
a girl. During cross-examination, he categorically deposed that
st
the 1 accused resided in Valsala’s house as a tenant. PW6 also
st
corroborated the evidence regarding the residence of the 1
accused in the said rented house and the circumstances
surrounding the said house.

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 26 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
19. PW12 was examined by the prosecution to prove the
circumstances relating to the alleged residence of PW1 and the
rd
involvement of the 3 accused in the alleged chapati business.
She deposed that, in 2016, she resided at Anappad, near
Blocknada, Malayinkeezhu, in a rented house. She denied the
prosecution allegation that she conducted a chapati business
there. She also turned hostile to the prosecution by denying the
rd
allegation that the 3 accused distributed chapatis. According to
her, she did not give any statement to the police to the effect
rd
that, on one day in 2015, at about 10.00 a.m., the 3 accused
reached the house with a girl. She also denied giving any
statement to the effect that, when she returned to the house at
Anappad after chapati distribution, she saw the said girl and the
accused coming out of the bedroom of the house. She denied the
prosecution allegation that she questioned their aforesaid acts
rd
and understood that the 3 accused engaged in sexual
intercourse with the girl. She denied her prior statement to the

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 27 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
effect that she came to know that PW1 had not attained majority
rd
and that the 3 accused presented her to many persons and
obtained money from them.
20. PW18, the Caretaker of Nirbhaya Home,
Poojappura, in 2017, deposed that PW1 was an inmate of the
home. She accompanied PW1 in connection with the
preparation of the scene mahazars in this case. In her cross-
examination, she deposed that she went to the places at
Kattakada and Vilappilsala only in connection with the
preparation of the scene mahazars.
21. PW25 examined in this case was the WCPO of
Neyyattinkara Police Station. She deposed that, as per the
directions of PW35, she recorded the additional statement of
PW1 at the Janamaithri Hall of the office of the DySP,
Nedumangad. She was also an attestor to Ext.P16, the seizure
mahazar prepared by PW35 on 17.08.2017 while taking into
custody the rent agreement executed by PW12 in favour of

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 28 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
Prema Kumari. At the time of cross-examination, PW25
deposed that Ext.P16 was prepared at the office of the DySP,
Nedumangad, and that the handwriting therein was hers. She
further deposed that, when the rent agreement was produced by
CW14, Prema Kumari, PW32 and PW35 were also present.
22. PW35 prepared Ext.P50, the scene mahazar of the
said place. Ext.P50 showed that the place of occurrence was the
bedroom of house No.M.P.IX/65, Payarathalamele Puthen
Veedu, situated opposite to the ESSAR petrol pump, 200 metres
south of Blocknada, Malayinkeezhu village. PW21, the
Malayinkeezhu Village Officer, prepared Ext.P12, the scene
plan, with regard to the place of occurrence. Ext.P50 also
showed that it was prepared in the presence of PW12. PW16 was
cited as an attestor to Ext.P50. PW16 turned hostile to the
prosecution by deposing that he was not a signatory to Ext.P50.
In this regard, PW35 admitted that PW1 was not present at the
time of preparation of Ext.P50.

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 29 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
23. PW2 was examined by the prosecution to
corroborate the evidence of PW1 regarding her relationship with
Vishnu Sagar and the circumstances surrounding the case.
24. It is well settled law that in cases of sexual
molestation, the evidence of the victim alone is sufficient to find
the guilt of the accused, if the same is wholly reliable and of
sterling quality. In the instant case, the evidence of PW1 found
to be wholly reliable and her status is that of a sterling witness.
The movements of PW1 was supported by the evidence of PW3
and PW10 and other witnesses, viz., PW4, PW5 and PW6.
rd
25. In this case, potency of the 3 accused was proved
through PW29, who had given Ext.P20 certificate stating that
“ there is nothing to suggest that the person cannot perform
sexual act ”.
26. On re-appreciation of the evidence, this Court is of
the view that the learned Special Judge rightly found
commission of offences punishable under Sections 366A, 376(1)

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 30 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
and 376D r/w 34 of the IPC as well as under Sections 4 r/w 3(a),
6 r/w 5(g) and 17 r/w 16 of the PoCSO Act and the contentions
raised by the learned counsel for the appellants could not be
accepted to upset the verdict impugned. Therefore, the
conviction imposed by the learned Special Judge could not be
interfered.
27. Coming to the sentence, on going through the
sentence imposed by the Special Court in parity with the
seriousness of the offences and taking into consideration of the
manner in which the offences were committed, no reduction in
sentence also is necessary. Therefore, the sentence also is
confirmed.
Hence, these appeals fail and are dismissed by
confirming the conviction and sentence imposed by the Special
Court. Since the appellants/accused Nos.1 to 4 are in Jail, no
other orders are required.
Registry is directed to forward a copy of this judgment to

CRL.A.NOS.2184, 2444 31 CNR : LHC011559012024
AND 2451 OF 2024
& CRL.A.NO.42 OF 2025
2026:KER:68690
the Special Court, for information and further steps.
Sd/-
A. BADHARUDEEN
JUDGE
Bb