The Supreme Court, on July 23, 2025, provided clarity in a criminal appeal involving a 78-year-old man convicted under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and Indian Penal Code (IPC). The Court upheld the conviction but directed that the multiple sentences awarded by the Trial Court would run concurrently instead of consecutively.
Background of the Case
In Criminal Appeal No. ___ of 2025, arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 8622/2023, the appellant Perumalsamy challenged his conviction and sentencing under:
- Section 10 of the POCSO Act: 5 years of rigorous imprisonment on each of the 3 counts.
- Section 506 (I) of IPC: 1 year of imprisonment on each of the 3 counts.
Read also: Supreme Court: Mangalore Has Jurisdiction in Cheque Bounce Case, Not Mumbai
The Trial Court had passed this order without clearly specifying whether the sentences would run concurrently or consecutively.
The appeal against the Trial Court's decision was dismissed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras, leading the appellant to approach the Supreme Court.
“The order of the Trial Court… is not properly worded and there is no clarity whether the sentence would run concurrently or consecutively.” — Supreme Court Bench
Taking into account the age of the appellant—78 years—and the fact that he had already undergone more than three years in custody, the Supreme Court exercised its discretion and clarified:
“The sentence awarded by the Trial Court shall run concurrently as the conviction was recorded in a single trial.”
Read also: Supreme Court Upholds Validity of Charge-Sheet Issued by Telecom GM Without Higher Approval
The Court, however, refused to interfere with the order of conviction itself.
- The conviction under Section 10 of POCSO and Section 506 (I) IPC remains upheld.
- The sentences will run concurrently, providing limited relief to the elderly appellant.
- The appeal was accordingly disposed of by the Bench of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Aravind Kumar.
Case Name: Perumalsamy vs The State of Tamil Nadu Represented by the Inspector of Police