Sowmiya Rajendrakumar
Published on: 26August, 2022 at 20:20 IST
The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has lamented the increasing prevalence of sexual abuse of children and the apathy surrounding the issue [Narayanan v State]
A Bench of Justices PN Prakash and R Hemalatha observed that today’s children are tomorrow’s leaders and unless we protect them, society will face a huge crisis in the future.
“The sexual abuse of children had become more prevalent and there should be a social movement against it. Moral education should focus on the importance of children and treating them with due care,” the Bench recorded.
The Court was hearing an appeal against the judgment of a sessions court sentencing a man to life imprisonment for sexually abusing 5 children who were all under the age of 9, one being just 3 years old.
The conviction was upheld primarily on the deposition of the children themselves who were found to be narrating the incident clearly.
“The heart rending experiences of the children as deposed by them have undoubtedly swept away the aspersion cast on the parents of the victim children of falsely implicating the appellant.” the Court recorded.
It was reasoned that a delay in lodging the police complaint was vey natural and could be attributed to their limited knowledge of the law and their traditional beliefs.
Further, the defence of the appellant that the doctor did not find any injuries on the children was rejected, given that the children may not have resisted, oblivious of what was happening to them. In fact, it was highlighted that the children were threatened that they would be pushed down from the first floor.
” The consequential effects of such sexual abuse can include depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, complex post-traumatic stress propensity to further Victimisation in adulthood.” the Court further recorded.
Mere absence of physical injury does not rule out the sexual acts of the appellant. The other effects cannot be assessed by physical examination, the Court added.
Therefore, it was concluded that this was simply a case of sexual adventure of an old paedophile.
The Court also recorded,”The appellant with a perverted sexual appetite has exploited as many as five children all younger than 9 years of age. The appellant himself was about 54 years old when he committed these acts”.
Further emphasising that coming forward and initiating the legal process requires a lot of courage, the Court refused to interfere with the order under challenge.
Advocate S Deenadhayalan appeared for the appellant while the State was represented by Additional Public Prosecutor A Thiruvadi Kumar.