'Unfortunate That Victim Was Tutored By Own Mother To Depose Falsely': Madras High Court Overturns Father's POCSO Conviction

Justice Sunder Mohan noted that the statement of the witnesses including the victim and the mother, was exaggerated, with malafide and was made only to wreak vengeance against the father while the divorce proceedings were pending between the parents.

“All the above facts suggest that the versions of the witnesses PW1 to PW3 are exaggerated, attended with malafides and made only to wreak vengeance. Unfortunately, the victim girl has been tutored by her own mother to depose falsely. It appears that the matrimonial differences and the consequential assault said to have been made by the appellant on PW1 and the divorce petition have triggered this false prosecution. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the conviction cannot be sustained on the basis of the evidence adduced on the side of the prosecution and consequently, the impugned judgment is liable to be set aside,” the court said.

The court was hearing an appeal filed by the father against his conviction and sentence by the POCSO Court, Puducherry.

The prosecution's case was that the father had sexually assaulted the victim 9his daughter). It was alleged that the father had inappropriately touched the private part of the victim, made her touch his penis, made her read pornographic books, and even peeped into the bedroom of the victim while she was changing her dress.

The complaint was lodged by the mother of the victim. After the trial, the special court found the father guilty for offences under Section 10 and 12 of the POCSO Act and Section 323 of the IPC.

During the appeal, the father argued that the complaint lodged by the wife was attended with malafides and it was only lodged after the father had filed a petition for divorce. It was also pointed out that before the complaint, the mother had even lodged a civil suit, and in the suit there has been no reference to any alleged sexual assaults.

It was also argued that except the victim, her mother and the grandmother, no other independent witness had been examined and neither was the victim subjected to any medical examination.

The prosecution however argued that the father was in the habit of committing sexual assaults repeatedly and merely because the complaint was not lodged immediately, the witnesses could not be disbelieved.

The court noted that the first offence was alleged to have occured when the victim was 4, second was when the victim was 8 and thereafter, after the victim attained puberty. The court noted that in none of these instances the mother or the grandmother had not given any complaint. The court remarked that the nature of allegations was serious and it was hard to believe that for nine years, the mother or the grandmother had not taken any action against the father.

The court noted that all the three witnesses had spoken about the incident in a parrot-like manner. The court also noted that the husband had filed a divorce petition, shortly after which the complaint was lodged by the wife.

Further, the court also found it unbelievable that the victim, deposing before the court at 14 years of age, had remembered the acts which were alleged to have been committed when she was 4- and 8-year-old. Thus, the court concluded that the victim was tutored.

Thus, concluding that the divorce proceeding had triggered the false prosecution, the court opined that the conviction could not be sustained and set aside the order, acquitting the father.

Counsel for Petitioner: Ms. K. Suriya Prabha for Mr. R. V. Pradeep

Counsel for Respondents: Mr. K. S. Mohandoss Public Prosecutor [Puducherry]

Case Title: V v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 50

Case No: CRL A No. 315 of 2023