Madras High Court

Madurai Bench of Madras HC: Lack of Clear Age Evidence Acquits Mahendran in POCSO Case

Updated
Mar 1, 2026 11:26 AM
madurai-bench-of-madras-hc-lack-of-clear-age-evidence-acquits-mahendran-in-pocso-case

Summary: Mahendran, accused of kidnapping and assault, is found not guilty by the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court because there wasn't clear evidence about the victim's age.

The Case Background

Initial Incident: On May 22, 2014, a 14-year-old girl from Rajapalayam was reportedly taken by Mahendran, who lives in Govindanpatti, during a temple festival in Uttudanpatti. He took her to different places, including his grandfather's house in Mel Eral, and allegedly committed sexual assault.

Complaint Filed: The girl's father reported her missing on May 24, 2014, leading to a police report being filed at Kadambur Police Station, Thoothukudi District.

Investigation and Trial

Police Action: The police arrested Mahendran on June 8, 2014, and changed the charges from "Girl Missing" to more serious offenses under IPC Section 366 and POCSO Act Section 4.

Trial Details: The Fast Track Mahila Court in Thoothukudi found Mahendran guilty on October 20, 2015. He was sentenced to 7 years for breaking the POCSO Act and 1 year for kidnapping.

Appeal and Arguments

Appeal Filed: Mahendran challenged the guilty verdict, arguing that the victim's age wasn't clearly proven, which is important under the POCSO Act. His lawyer pointed out problems in the evidence about her age.

Prosecution's Stand: The prosecution insisted the evidence was strong, supported by medical reports and the victim's testimony.

Court's Decision

Judge's Analysis: Justice N. Mala looked at the evidence, focusing on the victim's age. The court found the birth date evidence weak, as the main birth certificate wasn't shown, and the school record couldn't be trusted.

Medical Evidence: The doctor's report suggested the victim's age could be 17-18, which didn't match the prosecution's claim of her being a minor.

Outcome: On February 27, 2026, the court found Mahendran not guilty, citing lack of clear evidence about the victim's age and inconsistencies in her statements.

Verdict Summary

The court's decision highlights how important it is to have clear evidence in legal cases, especially about age in POCSO cases. Without solid proof, the assumption that the victim is a minor cannot be made.

Tags:
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act
Criminal Law
Consent