Madras HC Acquits Death Row Convict in POCSO Case, Flags 'Tutored' Child Testimony

The Madras High Court has acquitted a man who had been sentenced to death for the alleged sexual assault of five children, all below the age of ten, overturning a Special POCSO Court conviction after finding the prosecution's case riddled with inconsistencies.

A bench of Justice Anand Venkatesh and Justice KK Ramakrishnan delivered the verdict while hearing a reference by the State seeking confirmation of the death sentence, alongside the accused's own appeal against his conviction and punishment.

The case dates back to February 4, 2024, when the accused was alleged to have lured the children to his house by offering them mobile phones to play games and promising snacks. The prosecution accused him of repeatedly sexually assaulting the children, leading to his conviction and capital sentence.

Testimony appeared rehearsed, court finds

The bench scrutinised the statements of the child victims and their parents and concluded that the accounts appeared rehearsed. It noted that the evidence of the victims was strikingly similar in crucial respects, raising the possibility that they had been coached before speaking to the police and before deposing in court.

The court observed that the evidence indicated the children were tutored before making their statements, and that the possibility of suggestive tutoring could not be ruled out.

Discrepancies also emerged in the accounts of how the children had gathered at the accused's house. The defence argued that the alleged incident occurred during the daytime inside a house without a door or window, located in a densely populated residential area. If the children had screamed as claimed, their cries would likely have been heard by neighbours, the defence contended. The court noted that no independent witness was examined to establish that neighbours heard the children's cries or attempted to rescue them. It also took note of evidence suggesting that some of the children and their parents had previously had arguments with the accused.

Medical evidence found inconclusive

The court examined the medical evidence and found that the findings rested largely on the history narrated by the victims and their parents. Doctors had not detected any internal or external injuries on the children. Considered alongside other deficiencies in the prosecution's case, the medical evidence did not dispel the doubts surrounding the allegations.

Fair trial concerns

The bench found serious flaws in the conduct of the trial, holding that the accused had not received a fair and meaningful hearing. It pointed to the lack of an effective opportunity to consult and instruct his lawyer, the absence of counsel on important occasions, concerns over the effectiveness of cross-examination, procedural irregularities involving the victims and deficiencies in identification.

These issues, the court said, had prejudiced the accused and violated his fundamental right to a fair trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. The cumulative effect of these failures, it held, amounted to a fundamental breakdown of the trial process.

Warning against trial by media

The court also cautioned against the use of criminal law without sufficient scrutiny, particularly in cases that draw intense public attention. It said judges must not allow public pressure or media narratives to influence their assessment of evidence, stressing that high-profile cases place an extra duty on the bench to examine every piece of evidence exhaustively.

The court remarked that the case illustrated how stringent statutory provisions could be misused, leaving an innocent person under the shadow of a death sentence. It added that when reasonable doubt survives careful judicial scrutiny, acquittal is not an act of indulgence but the command of the rule of law, since no person can be convicted unless the prosecution proves guilt beyond reasonable doubt.