‘Kids can’t lie in sexual abuse cases’

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has held that in cases of child sexual abuse the court must believe what is reported by the child and not give in to misconceptions that children either lie or that they are tutored by parents to make false complaints against others and such myths should not affect the manner in which the Court responds to cases of child sexual abuse

Upholding the 10-year sentence granted to a person under POCSO Act for sexually abusing a five-year-old child, Justice S Vaidyanathan said, “There is no reason as to why a five-year-old girl is going to lie, more particularly, when she has withstood the cross-examination, after two years from the date of the alleged incident.”

“That apart, parents will not try to expose the child, unless the incident is so harsh. In this case, on a careful scrutiny of the evidence, I find that her evidence is so convincing and the same cannot be rejected at all. In fine, finding no merit in this appeal, this Court holds that the prosecution has proved that the accused has committed rape on the minor victim girl,” the judge said.

As per the prosecution, on September 26, 2011, around 5 pm, when a five-year-old girl studying in Class one, was playing with her friends near a Church, Ganapathy (appellant/accused) lifted her, kept her on his lap and committed rape on her.

Based on the statement given by the mother’s victim, Nagoor Police Station, registered a case under Section 376(2)

IPC for rape. On considering the evidences, the trial Court convicted and sentenced Ganapathy to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and pay a fine of Rs 2,000.

However, Ganapathy in his appeal at the High Court had contended that the FIR was registered with a delay of three days from the date of the alleged occurrence and the doctor who examined the victim girl, had spoken that there was no indication of any injury to her.

The other aspects raised in his defence included that the dress worn by victim girl as also that of the appellant, were not sent for examination, the eyewitness to the alleged occurrence had not been investigated and cited as a witness while the relative of the girl’s parents and the Panchayatdars turned hostile. But Justice Vaidyanathan while setting aside all contentions raised also held, “It is common knowledge that a child is prone to tutoring. But it does not mean that on account of the said apprehension, a child should always be viewed with suspicion and her evidence should be rejected.” “To make out an offence of rape, it is not necessary that the accused should have a complete penetration. Even partial penetration would be enough to make out an offence of rape,” the judge added.

There is no reason as to why a 5-year-old girl is going to lie, when she has withstood the crossexamination, after 2 years from the date of the alleged incident