CHENNAI: The life term awarded by a lower court to a 38-year-old man, who sexually abused his own minor daughter, has been upheld by a division bench of the Madras High Court.
“Though he is a man by appearance, by his behaviour towards his own daughter, he has exhibited animal instinct. This kind of domestic violence on his own daughter cannot be tolerated, a bench of Justices S Nagamuthu and N Authinathan said while dismissing a criminal appeal from Hakkim, a resident of Coimbatore district, on January 24.
According to Podanur police, Hakkim, then 35 years-old, penetrated his penis into his daughter’s vagina, then just 12 years-old, at his house on November 9, 2013. When he was half-way through, his wife entered the room.
Following a complaint from her, Podanur police registered a case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act on November 14. The Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, awarded life term to him on June 4, 2016. Hence, the criminal appeal challenging the conviction.
Though his counsel totally denied the charge, he later confined his argument to contend there was an unexplained delay of five days to lodge the complaint. Hence, the evidence of the mother and the victim should be doubted.
Rejecting this, the bench pointed out that the victim was too young to move the police. Perhaps, she would not have known the consequences of the act of the accused.
For the mother, the only perceivable reason for the delayed complaint must be that she would have had the intention to hide the sexual exploitation with a view to maintaining the honour and prestige of the family and also to protect the future of the victim girl.
Counsel then argued that the medical evidence did not corroborate the evidence of the complainants, as there was no presence of sperm in the vagina. Turning this down, the bench pointed out that the victim girl did not say that there was ejaculation of semen. She had only stated there was penetration, the bench noted.
Therefore, there would have been no chance for any semen being present in the vaginal smear taken from the girl. Assuming that there was ejaculation, since the victim was examined after about five days, due to passing of time or washing, the semen would have been washed off, the bench pointed out, refuting the arguments presented by the counsel for defence.
The appellant, a man by appearance, but an animal by behaviour, deserved the maximum punishment of life imprisonment for his heinous crime, the bench said and dismissed the appeal.