Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The POSCO court has ordered an inquiry against victims parents who in the matter of giving false evidence to save the church priest. The court had convicted the accused who is a priest of Catholic Church Robin Vadakkumchery for raping and impregnating a minor girl in 2016 and also sentence him to 20 years rigorous imprisonment.
In the present case, evidence was given against the prosecution by both the victim and the parents. The victim has deposed that there was no rape but it was consensual sexual intercourse with the accused and she was a major at the relevant time. The parents also supported this stand taken by the victim. The father of the victim had also deposed that the victim was a major.
The court has gone through the birth certificate and school records which showed she was minor at that time and saw that there were strong reasons which in prima facie give a conclusion that the victim and parents had given false evidence in this regard.
The Special Judge(POCSO) PN Vinod said, “It is evident that she has undergone extreme emotional trauma in life. Considering the said aspect and her young age, I am of the opinion that it is not expedient in the interest of justice to proceed against her”.
But u/s.191 r/w 193 of IPC the parents, the court said that inquiry should be made with regard to the commission of the offense. A preliminary inquiry was ordered by the court against parents of the victim and issued a notice to the show cause as to why action should not be initiated against them.
In this case, the victim herself had stated before the police that she was impregnated due to rape committed by her own father. During her examination, she stated that the victim and the accused had lost control and had consensual sexual intercourse. The accused admitted the paternity of the child born to the victim and contended that the act was consensual. The council made extensive references to Puranas and Indian Mythology to contend that it was natural human conduct. The court rejected the said submission stating thus: "Here, it is not a moral issue that arises for consideration by this court. The question is whether there was legal justification for A1 in having sexual intercourse with PW1. I have no doubt in my mind that the act committed by A1 was legally wrong and it amounted to the commission of offenses punishable u/s Sec.376 of IPC and u/s Sec.3 r/w Sec.4 and Sec.5 r/w Sec.6 of the POCSO Act." Sentenced To 20 Years imprisonment While awarding sentence of 20 years imprisonment, the court observed: "This is a case where A1 by his sexual adventures wrecked the life of a young girl. The wreckage was massive. I am of the view that the sentence to be imposed upon A1 has to match with the gravity of the offenses. However, considering the facts that the child born to PW1 and A1 is growing and the child did not have the fortune of meeting his father till date, I desist from imposing a life sentence upon A1."
86540
103860
630
114
59824