Madras High Court Confirms Death Sentence for Man Who Repeatedly Raped Three Minor Girls, Calls It 'Rarest of Rare'

The Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) recently confirmed the death sentence awarded to a Tirunelveli man convicted of repeatedly subjecting three girls, aged six, seven and eight, to aggravated penetrative sexual assault, holding that the offences constituted one of the 'rarest of rare cases' warranting capital punishment.

A bench of Justice N. Anand Venkatesh and Justice K.K. Ramakrishnan dismissed the appeal filed by Anandhasekar while confirming the death sentence imposed by the Special Court for POCSO cases, Tirunelveli.

While confirming the capital punishment, the bench said the court was acting "not out of vengeance, but out of a solemn duty to justice, deterrence, and the restoration of the moral order".

"For actions that have effectively slain the souls of three innocent children, the law can offer no sanctuary. The prisoner has forfeited his right to walk among humanity," the bench held.

It emphasised that although the death penalty is an extraordinary measure, reserved exclusively for the "rarest of rare" cases where the alternative is unquestionably foreclosed, the case at hand stood as the tragic epitome of that exception.

"A crime so grotesque, so utterly devoid of a shred of human conscience, demands a judicial response that mirrors society’s collective abhorrence. To spare the life of a perpetrator who showed such cold blooded, protracted cruelty would be an act of misplaced mercy, rendering the law a silent spectator to the destruction of the innocent," the bench said. 

The prosecution case was that Anandhasekar, a neighbour of the three child victims, repeatedly exploited the fact that their parents were daily-wage labourers who left for work every morning. On Saturdays, when the children gathered near the house of one victim's grandmother, he would allegedly take them inside the house, lock the door, repeatedly subject them to aggravated penetrative sexual assault, and threaten them with a knife to ensure they remained silent. According to the prosecution, the abuse continued for nearly a year before it came to light.

The incident surfaced on February 26, 2023, when one of the girls ran into her house after seeing the accused. Another child then spoke about his conduct while talking to a friend. The conversation was overheard by the child's mother, who questioned the girls and learnt that all three had allegedly been abused. She thereafter informed the other families and approached the police, leading to registration of the FIR.

In light of these facts, the bench said, "The law must possess a spine of steel when dealing with those who prey on children to satisfy their darkest instincts. Let this judgment serve as a stark, unyielding warning to any who believe they can manipulate, terrorize, and destroy the youth of our nation with impunity".

The matter reached the high court through a statutory death reference under Section 407 BNSS (earlier Section 366 CrPC) as well as the convict's appeal against his conviction and sentence.

The counsel for the convict argued that the children's statements were inconsistent, exaggerated, and the result of tutoring. The counsel also argued that a one-year delay in filing the complaint in such a case was enormous, and there was absolutely no explanation to justify it.

However, the high court observed that in a case of this nature, the families are very hesitant to lodge a complaint and prosecute a criminal case considering the judgment they would receive from society.

"In reality, there may be many such sexual abuses taking place, and only a few reach the court, and the rest suffer the agony silently," court said. 

Therefore, court held, the delay in lodging the complaint can never be a defence when it comes to sexual offences and particularly when it pertains to a child.

Further, on the issues raised questioning the children's testimonies, the high court held that they were consistent, natural and mutually corroborative.

It stressed that child witnesses must be appreciated from the perspective of a child and not by applying standards used for adult witnesses.

"The court has to put itself in the shoes of the victim child and try to understand what the victim child is actually attempting to explain or express," the bench said. It added that the language employed, expressions used and slight deviations in narration must all be assessed from the standpoint of a child.

The high court found that the testimonies of the three girls consistently established that the accused repeatedly isolated them, sexually assaulted them and threatened them with a knife if they disclosed the incidents. It observed that the children also consistently described witnessing the abuse of one another, lending assurance to their accounts. The bench held there was no reason for the children or their families to falsely implicate the accused.

Moreover, addressing the defence's reliance on medical evidence, court held that the absence of significant injuries or an intact hymen did not discredit the victims' testimony.

Referring to the wide definition of penetrative sexual assault under Section 3 of the POCSO Act, the bench held that the acts spoken to by the victims clearly satisfied the statutory ingredients of penetrative sexual assault and consequently attracted Sections 5(l) and 5(m) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

Court further held that once the prosecution established the foundational facts, the statutory presumptions under Sections 29 and 30 of the POCSO Act came into operation.

As the accused failed to rebut those presumptions or establish any motive for false implication, the court opined that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.

Case Title: State of Tamil Nadu v. Anandhasekar

Bench: Justice N. Anand Venkatesh and Justice K.K. Ramakrishnan

Date of Judgment: June 30, 2026