Case Name: State of Tamil Nadu v. Chandran

Factual Background

The case arose from a prosecution under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act). Chandran was accused of repeatedly sexually assaulting five children, allegedly by luring them to his house with promises of access to a mobile phone for playing games and the provision of snacks. The prosecution also alleged criminal intimidation of a victim.

The trial court convicted Chandran under provisions including Sections 5(l) read with 6 and 5(m) read with 6 of the POCSO Act, besides other offences, and imposed the death penalty in respect of the aggravated offences. The death sentence was referred to the Madras High Court for confirmation, while Chandran independently appealed against his conviction and sentence.

The accused challenged the prosecution’s evidence, alleging material inconsistencies in the children’s testimonies, deficiencies in identifying the accused, insufficient medical corroboration and procedural irregularities. He also challenged the effectiveness of his legal representation and the fairness of the trial. The State opposed the appeal, maintaining that the victims’ testimony and supporting evidence established guilt beyond reasonable doubt and that the case warranted the death penalty.

Court’s Analysis

The Division Bench emphasised that a death reference requires an independent and comprehensive reassessment of the entire evidence. The High Court must first establish whether the conviction is legally sustainable before considering confirmation of the death sentence. The seriousness of the allegations cannot substitute for proof beyond reasonable doubt.

Although the prosecution produced birth certificates and school records that satisfactorily established the victims’ ages, the Court found significant deficiencies in the remaining evidentiary foundation. The testimonies of the victims contained material inconsistencies and

were not sufficiently supported by the surrounding circumstances. The Court identified discrepancies concerning the alleged dates of occurrence; notably, the medical records reflected a date different from the prosecution’s account. The absence of injuries and the lack of medical corroboration assumed significance when considered cumulatively with the other deficiencies.

The Court also questioned the identification of the accused during the proceedings and the trial court’s assessment of the competency of the child witnesses to depose. It found that the preliminary questioning had not adequately established their capacity to understand questions and provide rational answers, raising concerns regarding compliance with the applicable evidentiary procedure.

Significantly, the Court identified violations of the accused’s right to a fair trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. The record did not establish that the accused had received effective opportunities to consult and instruct counsel or that legal representation had been meaningfully available on material occasions. The deficiencies concerning cross-examination, witness examination and identification were especially serious given the imposition of capital punishment.

The Court concluded that the cumulative deficiencies undermined the reliability of the prosecution case and that the charges had not been established beyond reasonable doubt.

Order of the Court

The High Court answered the death reference against the prosecution, allowed Chandran’s criminal appeal, set aside the conviction and death sentence, and acquitted him of all charges. He was directed to be released forthwith unless required in connection with another case. The Court also declined to order recovery of the compensation already received by the children or initiate proceedings against their parents in the peculiar circumstances of the case.

Written by Adv. K. Sri Hamsa