JUDGMENT : S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The Appellant is the sole accused in S.C. No. 121 of 2013 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila [Fast Track] Court, Erode. He stood charged for offence under Section 5(i) r/w Section 6 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 506(ii) of IPC. The trial court, by judgment dated 09.04.2014, convicted him under Sections 5(i) r/w 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and Section 506(ii) of IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and also to pay a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a further period of one year for offence under Section 5(i) r/w 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and to under go rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a further period of six months for offence under Section 506(ii) of IPC. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:- P.W.2 is the victim in this case. She was hardly 11 years old on the date of occurrence and she was studying in VIth Standard in a local school. The accused is aged 27 years. He also hails from the same village. On 21.03.2013, around 04.00 p.m. P.W.2 was playing in the school playground. At that time, the accused came to the said playground in a TVS Motorcycle. He told P.W.2 that he would take her to a nearby forest to show elephants. He told that the elephants had come to the said forest. Believing the words of the accused, P.W.2 went along with him in the motorcycle. On their way towards the forest, P.W.3 who was walking along the road, on seeing the accused taking P.W.2, enquired him as to where he was taking P.W.2, for which the accused told that he was taking P.W.2 to the nearby forest to show elephants. The accused proceeded further in his TVS-50 motor cycle along with P.W.2. Near the forest area, he took P.W.2 to a secluded place where he made P.W.2 to lie down and he closed her mouth. Then, according to P.W.2, the accused removed her pants and churidar and after completely undressing her, the accused penetrated into her vagina repeatedly with his penis. Near the forest area, he took P.W.2 to a secluded place where he made P.W.2 to lie down and he closed her mouth. Then, according to P.W.2, the accused removed her pants and churidar and after completely undressing her, the accused penetrated into her vagina repeatedly with his penis. P.W.2 cried out of pain. But, the accused did not stop having had sexual intercourse with her. After having completed sexual intercourse, he warned P.W.2 not to disclose about the happenings to anybody. He further told that, in case, she revealed the same to anybody, he would not hesitate even to kill her and family members. Thereafter, the accused allowed P.W.2r to wear her dresses, took her in his motor cycle and dropped her near a tamarind tree wherefrom P.W.2 with pains, returned home. 3. On returning home, P.W.2 informed her mother (P.W.1) that she had unbearable pain in her vagina, but, she did not disclose to P.W.1 that the accused had sexual intercourse with her. P.W.1 took P.W.2 to the bathroom and found that there was bleeding through vagina. P.W.1, being a poor village woman, believed that P.W.2 had attained puberty and that was the cause for the bleeding through vagina. As per the customary practise in her community, she took P.W.2 into her house and made P.W.2 to sit in a corner of the house. Since it was the practise in the community to burn the blood stained dresses of a girl after she attains puberty, P.W.1, the mother of P.W.2, burnt the chudidar and pants worn by P.W.2 which were stained with blood. P.W.1 made P.W.2 to wear a yellow colour saree as per the custom in the community. 4. As the time passed, P.W.1 expected that the bleeding would get arrested, but the bleeding was very excessive and it was, in fact, non-stop. Thereafter, P.W.2's father and grand mother took P.W.2 to a private hospital by name "P.G.K. Hospitals" at Anthiyur. P.W.5 Dr. Sofia Arun, examined her at 02.00 a.m. on 21.03.2013. She found P.W.2 very tired and also partially fainted. Her blood pressure level was hardly 80 ppm. There was profuse bleeding through vagina. Since P.W.2 was drowsy, P.W.5, the Doctor, could not conduct any internal examination. On conducting external examination, P.W.5, the Doctor, found that she had not attained puberty, but, however, some kind of sexual exploitation had been done to her. Her blood pressure level was hardly 80 ppm. There was profuse bleeding through vagina. Since P.W.2 was drowsy, P.W.5, the Doctor, could not conduct any internal examination. On conducting external examination, P.W.5, the Doctor, found that she had not attained puberty, but, however, some kind of sexual exploitation had been done to her. Out of the said suspicion, P.W.5 enquired P.W.2's mother. P.W.1, the mother of P.W.1, who was unaware of the happenings, was not able to say anything. P.W.2 was under observation for about two hours. There were blood transfusions given and then P.W.5, the Doctor, advised P.W.2 to be taken to Government Hospital at Anthiyur. Ex.P.4 is the medical record pertaining to the treatment given by P.W.5. When P.W.2 was undergoing treatment under P.W.5, P.W.1 and P.W.5, the Doctor, enquired P.W.2 after she was freed from drowsiness. At that juncture, P.W.2 narrated the entire events to P.W.1. Immediately, P.W.1 went to Bargur Police Station and made a complaint at 09.00 a.m. on 22.03.2013 under Ex.P.1. P.W.13, the then Sub Inspector of Police, on receipt of the said complaint, he registered a case in Crime No.12 of 2013 under Section 376 and 506(i) of IPC. Ex.P.22 is the FIR. Thereafter, he forwarded both the complaint-Ex.P.1 and the FIR-Ex.P.22 to the court which were received by the learned jurisdictional Magistrate at 03.00 a.m. on 23.03.2013. In the mean time, he handed over the case diary to the Inspector of Police [P.W.14] for investigation. 5. As advised by P.W.5-the Doctor, P.W.2 was taken to the Government Hospital, Anthiyur where P.W.6, the Doctor, examined P.W.2 on 23.03.2013 at 01.05 a.m. She found that there was still bleeding through vagina. There were blood stains on the labia majora. The hymen was found ruptured. There were blood stains on the undergarment of P.W.2. There were no other external injuries on the body of P.W.2. She complained of pain on her abdomen and the hip area. P.W.6, the Doctor, treated her in the hospital. Ex.P.5 is the accident register. 6. P.W.14, taking up the case for investigation rushed to the hospital, examined P.W.2, P.W.1 and the father of P.W.2 and recorded their statements. Then, he recovered a blood stained under garment [jatti] and a blood stained yellow polyester saree from the person of P.W.2 under a mahazar (Ex.P2) in the presence of P.W.4 and another witnesses. 6. P.W.14, taking up the case for investigation rushed to the hospital, examined P.W.2, P.W.1 and the father of P.W.2 and recorded their statements. Then, he recovered a blood stained under garment [jatti] and a blood stained yellow polyester saree from the person of P.W.2 under a mahazar (Ex.P2) in the presence of P.W.4 and another witnesses. Then, P.W.14 took P.W.2 and others to the place of occurrence and prepared an observation mahazar (Ex.P3) and a rough sketch (Ex.P23) at the place identified by P.W.2 as the place of occurrence in the presence of P .W.4 and another witness. On 23.03.2013 at 10.00 a.m., he arrested the accused in the presence of P.W.11 and another witness. On such arrest, the accused gave a voluntary confession in which he disclosed the place where he had hidden a jatti which he was warring at the time of occurrence. Pursuant to his disclosure statement, the accused led the police and the witnesses to the place of hideout. Thereafter, P.W.14 recovered the jatti [M.O.3] produced by the accused under a mahazar (Ex.P13). Then, P.W.14 forwarded the accused to the court for judicial remand with a request forward him for medical examination. He forwarded the blood stained material objects recovered from P.W.2 and the jatti recovered from accused also to the court with a request to send them to the forensic sciences laboratory for chemical examination. On the orders of the court, the accused was subjected to radiological test to ascertain his age. In the meant time, P.W.14 collected the school certificate to prove the age of the victim. Then, the accused was taken to the hospital for medical examination. 7. P.W.7, Dr. Sridevi, examined P.W.2 on 01.04.2013. She took smear from the vagina of P.W.2 and forwarded the same for analysis. P.W.8, Dr. Gokulanaramanan, examined P.W.2 and certified that she was between 10 - 12 years of age. Ex.P.8 is his certificate. In the mean time, P.W.9, Dr. Kesavan Lingam, examined the accused on 26.03.2013. He estimated that the age of the accused was between 24-26 years. Ex.P.10 is his certificate. He further examined the accused and certified that the accused was capable of performing penile sexual intercourse with a woman. Ex.P11 is his certificate. On completing the investigation, P.W.14 laid charge sheet against the accused. 8. Kesavan Lingam, examined the accused on 26.03.2013. He estimated that the age of the accused was between 24-26 years. Ex.P.10 is his certificate. He further examined the accused and certified that the accused was capable of performing penile sexual intercourse with a woman. Ex.P11 is his certificate. On completing the investigation, P.W.14 laid charge sheet against the accused. 8. Based on the above materials, the trial court framed two charges as detailed in the first paragraph of this judgment. The accused denied the same. In order to prove the same, on the side of the prosecution, as many as14 witnesses were examined, 25 documents and 3 materials objects were marked. 9. Out of the said witnesses, P.W.2, the victim has vividly spoken about the entire occurrence. P.W.1 has stated that on 21.03.2013 at 04.00 p.m., P.W.2 had gone to the school ground to play games and returned back with pains and bleeding through her vagina. She has stated about the treatment underwent by P.W.2 in the hospitals. She has further stated that when P.W.2 was undergoing treatment under P.W.5, the Doctor, she had narrated about the entire occurrence. P.W.3 has stated that on the day of occurrence around 04.00 p.m., he found the accused going in his TVS-50 motor cycle towards the forest area. He has further stated that when he enquired the accused, he told him that he was taking P.W.2 to the nearby forest to show her elephants. P.W.4 has stated about the preparation of the observation mahazar and the rough sketch. P.Ws.5 to 7 are the Doctors, who treated P.W.2. P.W.8, the Doctor, has spoken about the age of P.W.2. P.W.9 has stated that on his medical examination, he found that the accused was 24 - 26 years of age and he was capable of performing the penile sex with a woman. P.W.10, the Headmaster of Bargur Tribal Welfare High School where P.W.2 was studying. According to her, as per the school records, the date of birth of P.W.2 is 08.07.2002. Ex.P12 is the certificate issued by her. 10. P.W.11 has spoken about the arrest of the accused and the consequential recovery of jatti [M.O.3] at the instance of the accused. P.W.12 has stated that on the orders of the learned Magistrate, he forwarded material objects for chemical examination. According to the chemical analysis report, human blood stains were found on the dress materials recovered from P.W.2. 10. P.W.11 has spoken about the arrest of the accused and the consequential recovery of jatti [M.O.3] at the instance of the accused. P.W.12 has stated that on the orders of the learned Magistrate, he forwarded material objects for chemical examination. According to the chemical analysis report, human blood stains were found on the dress materials recovered from P.W.2. P.W.13 has spoken about the registration of the case and handing over the case diary to P.W.14. P.W.14 has spoken about the investigation done by him in this case and the filing of charge sheet against the accused. 11. When the above incriminating materials were put to the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, he denied the same. However, he did not choose to examine any witness on his side nor did he mark any document. His defence was a total denial. 12. Having considered all the above, the trial court convicted the accused and accordingly punished him as detailed in the first paragraph of this judgment. That is how, the accused is now before this court with this criminal appeal. 13. We have heard the learned counsel for the Appellant/Accused and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent/State and also perused the records carefully. 14. As we have already narrated above, P.W.2, the victim has vividly spoken about the entire occurrence in her evidence. She has stated that when she was playing game in the school ground, the accused came in his TVS-50 motor cycle and told her that she would show her elephants in the nearby forest. Believing the words of the accused, according to P.W.2, she went along with him and on their way to the forest, P.W.3 was coming from the opposite direction along the road. P.W.3 has stated that when he enquired the accused, the accused told that he was taking P.W.2 to show elephants in the forest. P.W.2 has also stated about the said fact. Thereafter, the accused took P.W.2 to a secluded place where, according to P.W.2, the accused undressed her and penetrated into her vagina repeatedly with his penis in spite of P.W.2 crying out of pain. Then, according to P.W.2, the accused allowed her to wear the dresses, took her in his motor cycle and dropped her near a tamarind tree. Thereafter, the accused took P.W.2 to a secluded place where, according to P.W.2, the accused undressed her and penetrated into her vagina repeatedly with his penis in spite of P.W.2 crying out of pain. Then, according to P.W.2, the accused allowed her to wear the dresses, took her in his motor cycle and dropped her near a tamarind tree. This evidence of P.W.2 is so cogent and convincing which also draws corroboration from the evidence of P.W.3. The medical evidence duly corroborates the evidence of P.W.2. P.W.5 has stated that when P.W.2 was brought for examination, she found that she was partially fainted. P.W.2 was not in a position to speak. On examination, she found bleeding through the vagina and on further examination, she found that P.W.2 had not attained puberty but, she had been sexually exploited. Thus, the medical evidence also duly corroborates the evidence of P.W.2. From these evidences, in our considered view, the prosecution has proved that the accused committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault on P.W.2. 15. The learned counsel for the appellant/accused would bring to the attention of this court that though the occurrence had allegedly taken place on 21.03.2013 at or about 04.00 p.m., the FIR was registered only at 09.00 p.m. on 22.03.2013. The learned counsel pointing out the inordinate delay in lodging the complaint would submit that the case of the prosecution thus becomes doubtful. But, we do not have any such doubt at all in our mind as the delay has been properly explained by P.W.1. Being a child, P.W.2, who was then under pain and trauma, out of pain and horror, would not have disclosed about the occurrence immediately to P.W.1. P.W.1, a poor village woman, was also then under the honest impression that P.W.2 had attained puberty. That was the reason why, she burnt the undergarments of P.W.2 which were blood stained as per the custom prevailing in the community. She made her to wear yellow saree and further made her to sit in the corner of the house as per the custom prevailing in their community. The fact that P.W.2 was sexually exploited came to light only after P.W.5, the Doctor, on examination found that P.W.2 had not attained puberty, but, the bleeding was due to sexual exploitation. She made her to wear yellow saree and further made her to sit in the corner of the house as per the custom prevailing in their community. The fact that P.W.2 was sexually exploited came to light only after P.W.5, the Doctor, on examination found that P.W.2 had not attained puberty, but, the bleeding was due to sexual exploitation. Even then, P.W.1 was not aware as to who was the cause for the same inasmuch as P.W.2 was still drowsy and was unable to speak. After P.W.2 regained conscious, when she was inquiring repeatedly by P.W.1, the mother and P.W.5-the Doctor, P.W.2 started narrating the entire occurrence with pains. Immediately, thereafter, P.W.1 had gone to the police and made the complaint under Ex.P.1. Thus, the delay in preferring the complaint has been perfectly explained by the prosecution in a quite natural manner and so there is no doubt at all arising out of the said delay. 16. The learned counsel for the appellant would next submit that P.W.3 was in inimical terms towards the accused and, therefore, the accused had been falsely implicated in this case. This story propounded by the accused is too big a thing to swallow. It is not as if without any injury such a complaint had been made. P.W.2 was profusely bleeding all through which required even transfusion of blood to recoup the loss of blood. The Doctors, who treated her, found that there were injuries on the labia majora of P.W.2. The hymen was also found ruptured. The Doctor, opined that the excessive bleeding was due to injuries caused to the genitalia of P.W.2. Thus, it is highly unbelievable and beyond imagination of anyone that out of animosity these injuries would have been caused with a view to falsely implicate the accused in the case. Therefore, this argument of the learned counsel for the appellant is rejected. 17. The learned counsel for the appellant/accused would submit that P.W.2 was, according to the prosecution, initially taken to a private Hospital and then to the Bargur Government Hospital, but there is no medical record for the same. In our considered view, the evidence of P.W.5, the Doctor, who examined P.W.2, at the first instance by itself is sufficient to corroborate the evidence of P.W.2 and the subsequent medical examination and treatment are only supportive piece of evidences. 18. In our considered view, the evidence of P.W.5, the Doctor, who examined P.W.2, at the first instance by itself is sufficient to corroborate the evidence of P.W.2 and the subsequent medical examination and treatment are only supportive piece of evidences. 18. At this juncture, let us have a look into Section 29 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, which reads as follows: "29. Presumption as to certain offences.- Where a person is prosecuted for committing or abetting or attempting to commit any offence under sections 3, 5, 7 and section 9 of this Act, the Special Court shall presume, that such person has committed or abetted or attempted to commit the offence, as the case may be unless the contrary is proved." 19. In the instant case, from out of the evidences of P.Ws.1, 2, 3 and the medical evidence, since the fundamental fact required to raise presumption under Section 29 of the Act have been proved, we have to necessarily presume that the accused has committed the offence charged. Of course, the said presumption is rebuttable. But, the accused has not rebutted the said presumption, either by means of direct evidence or by means of any circumstantial evidence. For a moment, we do not say that such rebuttal need to be made with the same vigor with which guilt of a person is required to proved by the prosecution beyond all reasonable doubts. But, in this case, absolutely, there is no material to rebut the presumption raised under Section 29 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. Thus, we hold that the prosecution has clearly proved that the accused had committed an aggravated penetrative sexual assault as defined in Section 5(i) of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and so the he is liable for punishment under Sections 6 of the said Act. Similarly, by criminally intimidating P.W.2 not to disclose about the occurrence to anyone, the accused has committed an offence punishable under Section 506(ii) of IPC. 20. Now, turning to the quantum of punishment, the trial court has imposed imprisonment for life under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that it is excessive. The accused is a young man aged 24 years. He has got a wife and children to take care of. Now, turning to the quantum of punishment, the trial court has imposed imprisonment for life under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that it is excessive. The accused is a young man aged 24 years. He has got a wife and children to take care of. He has got no bad antecedents. There are lot of chances for his reformation. 21. We have considered these mitigating circumstances. The offence committed by the accused is so heinous. He had shown an animal behaviour by sexually exploiting an innocent young girl of eleven years old. The injuries caused by the accused are not only to the body of P.W.2, but to her soul as well. The trauma that she had undergone by the act of the accused will be everlasting and this will have its own psychological effect in her life throughout. At the same time, we have to take into account the mitigating circumstances as well. As a measure of balance between these two, we are, therefore, of the considered view that sentencing the appellant/accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years which is the minimum punishment provided under the act would meet the ends of justice for the offence under Section 5(i) of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 which is punishable under Section 6 of the said Act. We are not inclined to interfere with the payment of fine of Rs. 5,000/- and also compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/- directed by the trial court. We are also not inclined to interfere with the direction issued to the District Collector to pay compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- [Rupees Two Lakhs only] to the victim under "The Tamil Nadu Victim Compensation Scheme, 2013" as framed under Section 357-A of Cr.P.C. Similarly, we do not find any reason to interfere with the conviction and sentence imposed for the offence under Section 506(ii) of IPC. 22. In the result, this criminal is partly allowed in the following terms:- (1) The conviction of the appellant for offence under Sections 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 is hereby confirmed. However, the substantive sentence of imprisonment for life imposed by the trial court under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 is reduced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years. However, the substantive sentence of imprisonment for life imposed by the trial court under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 is reduced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years. The fine of Rs. 5,000/- and compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/- directed by the trial court and the default sentence for the above said offence are hereby confirmed. (2) The conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant/accused by the trial court for the offence under Section 506(ii) of IPC are hereby confirmed. (3) It is directed that the above sentences shall run concurrently and the period of detention already undergone by the appellant/accused shall be given set off as required under Section 428 of Cr.P.C. (4) The compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- ordered to be paid by the District Collector, Erode, under the Tamil Nadu Victim Compensation Scheme as framed under Section 357-A of Cr.P.C. is also confirmed.