The Court was hearing a criminal appeal filed by K Dhandapani, challenging orders of the Madras High Court, which had confirmed his conviction under charges of rape and POCSO Act.
According to the prosecution case, Dhandapani had allegedly raped the minor victim on the promise of marriage. She gave birth to the first child when she was merely 14 years old while the second child was born a year later.
The appellant highlighted the fact that he has married the victim and that they are now leading a happy life.
The Court, in order to verify the contention, had ordered the trial court to record the survivor’s statement and her present status.
Subsequently, the same was placed on record.
“The statement of the prosecutrix has been placed on record in which she has categorically stated that she has two children and they are being taken care of by the appellant and she is leading a happy married life,” the bench noted.
The prosecution vehemently opposed the plea filed by Dhandapani and argued that the marriage between the appellant and the prosecutrix is not legal, since she was minor.
It expressed the apprehension that the said marriage might be only for the purpose of escaping punishment and there is no guarantee that the appellant will take care of the prosecutrix and the children after the Supreme Court grants relief to him.
The Court, however, rejected that argument and set aside the conviction, while making it clear that this order shouldn’t be treated as a precedent.
“In case, the appellant does not take proper care of the prosecutrix, she or the State on behalf of the prosecutrix can move this Court for modification of this order,” the Court added.
Source: Barandbench
