MADURAI: Acquitting a man who was convicted and sentenced to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment for sexually assaulting and impregnating a minor girl in Virudhunagar in 2018, the Madurai Bench of Madras HC ordered a re-probe in the case.
Justice K Murali Shankar, who heard an appeal filed by the man, Mariappan, noted that the DNA sample of the female child born to the victim did not match his. He also cited three other reasons - the inordinate delay in lodging the complaint, fixing the accused belatedly, and not conducting potency tests on the accused- which created suspicion over the entire prosecution case.
The judge criticised the police for failing to conduct further investigation even after knowing that he was not the biological father of the child born to the victim girl. The judge also observed that previously there was a practice in the criminal courts of marking the entire confession statement of the accused and it was stopped after the HC came down heavily on it.
“But the practice of marking the entire statements under Section 164 CrPC (witness statement) is on the rise. It is high time the criminal courts understood the scope and evidentiary value of the statement recorded under the section, and stopped the practice of marking the entire statements. The criminal court should permit the prosecution as well as defence, only to mark the particular portion of the statement recorded under the section, either for corroboration or for contradiction,” the judge added.
Mariappan was selling fruits on a push-cart in Virudhunagar. The prosecution had alleged in March 2018, when the victim, aged 13 then, and her brother had gone to get fruits from Mariappan, he had lured the kids to come to his house at night, by promising free fruits, and had sexually assaulted her. He indulged in the offence nearly thrice, the prosecution claimed.
However the judge noted though the victim’s parents came to know about her pregnancy in August 2018, they did not lodge a complaint till the hospital informed them about the delivery to the child welfare authorities in December 2018. He also pointed out the victim named the accused only during the third time she was examined by the police, nearly five days after the complaint was lodged.