She Was In School Uniform: Madras High Court Confirms Conviction under POCSO Act, Commutes Life Sentence of Three

Case: Pastor Muniyandi @ Ramesh & Ors. v. State Represented by Inspector of Police

Coram: Justices P.N Prakash and A. A Nakkiran

Case No.: Crl.A.Nos.130 of 2018, 190 & 506 of 2019

Court Observation: “….in the cross-examination of “X” (P.W.2), she has clearly stated that she was in school uniform, when she was being taken to the house of Pastor Muniyandi @ Ramesh (A-2) and Joseph Raja (A-3). Therefore, Pastor Muniyandi @ Ramesh (A-2) and Joseph Raja (A-3), who were around 39 and 35 years, respectively, at the time of the incident (as could be seen from their statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C.), cannot be heard to say that they believed “X” (P.W.2) was not a minor.”

“However, “X” (P.W.2) has stated that Vijayakumar (A1) did tell her that he was a married man with two children, but, has been deserted by his wife and children. Vijayakumar (A-1) has further struck a sympathy cord in the mind of “X” (P.W.2) saying that he is intensely in love with her and wanted to marry her. Would the same, by itself, be sufficient to exonerate Vijayakumar (A-1) from the charges?”

“….satisfactory materials have been placed before us to show that the date of birth of “X” (P.W.2) is 06.04.2002 and even according to the medical evidence, “X” (P.W.2) was between 14 and 15 years at the time of occurrence. Therefore, consent has no relevance at all in this case, but, can at the most be considered as a mitigating factor, while deciding the question of sentence”

“That apart, under Section 29 of the POCSO Act, there is a presumption clause, which not only brings in the actual offender but also the abettor and the burden is on the accused to prove the contrary”

“Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the conviction of the appellants under various provisions as set out… is confirmed. As for the sentence, we are of the opinion that interests of justice will be served, if the life imprisonment that has been awarded on the appellants is reduced to fixed terms…”

Previous Posts

Threshold of Public Interest Must To Prevent Bypassing of Civil Courts for Enforcement of Contractual Obligations: Bombay High Court

Using Term Straight Shooter in Message Doesnt Amount to Extortion or Criminal Intimidation: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Right To Withdraw Notice Of Voluntary Retirement Before Intended Date Lost By Accepting Post-Retiral Benefits: Bombay High Court

CPC Second Appeal Can’t Interfere With Orders Solely On Ground of Sympathy, Substantial Question of Law Must: Delhi High Court

Interest Liability under GST Can’t Be Raised Without Initiating Adjudication Process If Assessee Raises Dispute: Jharkhand High Court

In Absence of Specific Pleading by Party about Self Acquired Suit Property, It Is Presumed To Be Joint Family Property: Karnataka High Court

Can Exercise Writ Jurisdiction against Private Party That Wrongly Benefits From Inaction of Public Authorities in Discharge of Public Duty: Bombay HC

No One Can Be Permitted to Take the Benefit of a Wrong Order Passed By A Court: Supreme Court

No Illegality in Senior Lawyer Filing Joint Vakalat Along With Junior Counsel for Client: Kerala High Court

Supreme Court Bars Charging Compound Interest Or Penal Interest On Any Borrower During Loan Moratorium; Refuses Moratorium Extension Download Judgement

No One Can Be Permitted to Take the Benefit of a Wrong Order Passed By A Court: Supreme Court

Keywords

Conviction under POCSO Act