Madras High Court Overturns Father's POCSO Conviction Citing Multiple Anomalies in Prosecution Case
In a significant ruling, the Madras High Court has set aside the conviction of a man who was sentenced to five years of rigorous imprisonment under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act for allegedly committing aggravated sexual assault on his daughter over a nine-year period. The court identified several critical anomalies in the prosecution's case that raised serious doubts about the veracity of the evidence presented.
Key Anomalies That Led to Acquittal
Justice Sunder Mohan, presiding over the case, highlighted multiple inconsistencies that undermined the prosecution's narrative. These included:
- Parroting of Tutored Statements: The court observed that the testimonies appeared rehearsed and lacked spontaneity, suggesting external influence.
- Timing of Complaint: A complaint was lodged only after the husband filed for divorce, indicating potential ulterior motives linked to matrimonial disputes.
- Property Dispute Involvement: The case emerged amidst a property dispute between the husband and wife, further complicating the motives behind the allegations.
- Memory Recall Issues: The ability of a 14-year-old girl to vividly recall incidents from when she was just four years old was questioned for its reliability.
- Delayed Filing: A nine-year delay in filing the complaint raised suspicions about the timing and intent behind the allegations.
Justice Mohan remarked, "All the above facts suggest that versions of the witnesses are exaggerated, attended with mala fides, and made only to wreak vengeance. Unfortunately, the girl was tutored by her own mother to depose falsely."
Court's Rationale and Legal Implications
The court concluded that the conviction could not be sustained based on the evidence adduced by the prosecution. It noted that the case appeared to be triggered by matrimonial differences, including an assault on the wife by the husband and the subsequent divorce petition. The judgment stated, "This court is of the view that the conviction cannot be sustained on the basis of evidence adduced on the side of the prosecution and, consequently, judgment of the trial court dated Feb 23, 2023, is liable to be set aside."
This ruling underscores the importance of scrutinizing evidence in sensitive cases under the POCSO Act, where allegations must be backed by credible and untampered testimony to ensure justice.
Prosecution's Stance and Defense Arguments
The prosecution had argued that the husband habitually committed sexual assaults, and the delay in filing the complaint should not discredit the victim or her mother. They emphasized that there was no apparent reason for the girl to falsely accuse her father, and minor contradictions in evidence should not undermine witness credibility.
However, the defense countered effectively, pointing out that prior to the complaint, the wife had filed a suit for injunction in a Puducherry family court without mentioning any sexual assault, except for a vague reference to the husband peeping into the girl's bedroom. The husband's counsel highlighted critical gaps in the prosecution's case:
- No independent witnesses were examined to corroborate the allegations.
- Only the girl, her mother, and grandmother testified, raising concerns about bias.
- The girl was not subjected to medical tests to substantiate the claims.
- The evidence presented failed to inspire confidence due to inconsistencies and improvements over time.
This case highlights the delicate balance courts must maintain between protecting victims of sexual offenses and ensuring that convictions are based on solid, uncontaminated evidence, free from external influences and personal vendettas.
