Police Have No Power To Probe Or File Chargesheet Under PCPNDT Act: Supreme Court Rules Cognizance Bar Absolute 'Cannot Claim Pension Scheme Post-Retirement After Accepting CPF Benefits': Supreme Court Rules Regularisation Doesn't Relate Back To Initial Appointment 'Offence Within Four Corners Of Room Not In Public View': Supreme Court Quashes SCST Act Charges Against School Manager Give A Dog A Bad Name And Hang Him: Supreme Court Quashes UP Gangsters Act Cases; Rules Punishing Mere Status Violates Article 20(1) Child Of Tender Age Easy Prey To Tutoring: Supreme Court Quashes Double Murder Conviction Based On Solitary Child Witness 'State Cannot Supplant PSC's Role By Conducting Exhaustive Eligibility Enquiry': Supreme Court Limits Executive Power In Post-Selection Document Verification Revenue Entry Neither Creates Nor Extinguishes Title: Supreme Court Holds Limitation Against Co-Owner Cannot Run Without Open And Unequivocal Ouster 125 CrPC | Obligation To Maintain Children Cannot Be Divided By Arithmetic Alone': Supreme Court Rules Mother's Income No Ground To Halve Father's Liability 'Scramble For Possession': Supreme Court Directs Appointment Of Advocate Receiver Amid Clash Between Consent Decree Execution & Gujarat Tenancy Act Claims 'Enmity Is A Double-Edged Weapon': Allahabad High Court Acquits Murder Convicts After Medical Evidence Flaws Expose 'Eye-Witness' Lies Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Remand Extension Granted Without Notice To Accused, Grants Default Bail 167(2) CRPC No Violation Of Natural Justice If Borrower Fails To Produce Records Or Seek Personal Hearing: Calcutta High Court Upholds Bank's 'Fraud' Account Classification Cannot Exploit Entire Land's FAR For New Tower Once OC Is Issued Without Flat Owners' Consent: Karnataka High Court Mandates TDR Purchase Brethren Assembly Hall Is A 'Church' Under Foreign Liquor Rules, Bar Hotel Cannot Function Within Prohibited Distance: Kerala High Court Fence-Sitters Cannot Claim Arrears After Inordinate Delay, But Entitled To Notional Fixation For Pension: Madhya Pradesh High Court Strikes At The Foundation Of Institutional Integrity: Punjab And Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail In Medical PG Admission Fraud Case Foreign Law Degree Taken Directly After School Cannot Be Treated As 'First Degree' For Admission To 3-Year LL.B. In India: Bombay High Court Supreme Court Relaxes 3-Year Bar Practice Rule For Civil Judge Entry, Introduces 1-Year Practice & Clerkship Model

Parrot-Like Testimonies Raise Doubts: Madras High Court Acquits Deceased Teacher in POCSO Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


 

High Court sets aside trial court’s conviction due to inconsistencies in victim testimonies and procedural lapses in investigation.

The Madras High Court has overturned the conviction of a deceased primary school teacher, Sakthivel, accused of sexually harassing eight minor girl students. The appellate court found significant inconsistencies in the victim testimonies and procedural lapses in the investigation, leading to the acquittal. The bench, led by Justice R. Hemalatha, emphasized the necessity for clear and consistent evidence in cases involving serious allegations under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

The case revolved around allegations that Sakthivel, a teacher at Solappadi Government Primary School in Dharmapuri District, sexually harassed eight girl students aged 9 and 10 years by inappropriate touching and pinching. The trial court convicted Sakthivel under Section 7 read with Section 8 of the POCSO Act. However, the High Court’s review of the trial court’s judgment revealed that the conviction was based on questionable evidence and procedural deficiencies.

The court noted that the testimonies of the eight victims (P.W.1 to P.W.8) were strikingly similar, raising doubts about their authenticity. Justice Hemalatha remarked, “All the eight victims have given a parrot-like version thereby causing a doubt as to whether they are tutored. Generally, a tutored witness deposes in a parrot-like fashion and a natural witness is bound to commit mistakes.” The court found it incomprehensible that no complaints of a sexual nature were made to the Assistant Elementary Education Officer (AEO) or the Headmaster during initial inquiries.

The Assistant Elementary Education Officer (P.W.13) and the Headmaster (P.W.14) testified that no complaints of sexual harassment were received during their initial investigations on March 2, 2015, and March 4, 2015. It was only after these dates that allegations of sexual misconduct surfaced, prompting skepticism about their veracity. The court highlighted, “The specific allegation from the child line against the deceased appellant on 04.03.2015 was regarding the act of pinching the girl children… The only demand there was the transfer of the teacher to some other school which was also acceded to.”

The investigation revealed several procedural lapses, including delayed filing of the complaint and inconsistencies in the testimonies of key witnesses. The medical examination of the victim (P.W.1) did not corroborate the allegations of severe sexual harassment, further weakening the prosecution’s case. The court noted, “Lack of clarity in the evidence of P.W.1 to P.W.8 as to the date or time of occurrence or other details also cast doubt on their veracity.”

The High Court emphasized that the presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act, which assumes guilt until proven otherwise, requires the prosecution to establish foundational facts beyond reasonable doubt. The bench stated, “This presumption would operate only when the prosecution proves the foundational facts in the context of allegations against the accused that too beyond reasonable doubts.

Justice Hemalatha remarked, “The overwhelming evidence of P.W.13 and P.W.14 weaken the prosecution case. In such circumstances, this court concludes that the prosecution has failed to prove their case against the deceased appellant.”

The High Court’s judgment sets aside the trial court’s conviction and acquits the deceased appellant, Sakthivel, underscoring the importance of reliable and consistent evidence in sexual harassment cases. This decision highlights procedural scrutiny and the necessity for clear, corroborative evidence in upholding convictions under the POCSO Act. The court also directed the refund of any fine amount paid by the legal heirs of the deceased appellant.

Date of Decision: July 19, 2024

Sakthivel (Deceased) & Others v. The State represented by Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Pennagaram, Dharmapuri District

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Latest Legal News