Chattisgarh High Court
Kishan Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 21 April, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
MANPREET
2026:CGHC:18096-DB
KAUR
Digitally signed
by MANPREET
KAUR
Date: 2026.04.23
NAFR
17:40:00 +0530
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRA No. 229 of 2024
Kishan Yadav S/o Sahdev Yadav Aged About 31 Years R/o Ward No.
09, Dabhra, Police Station Dabhra, District Janjgir Champa (C.G.)
... Appellant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Dabhra District Janjgir
Champa (C.G.)
... Respondent(s)
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Chitendra Singh, Advocate
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Saumya Rai, Dy. G.A.
Hon’ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Hon’ble Mr. Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge
Judgment on Board
Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
21.04.2026
1 Heard Mr. Chitendra Singh, learned counsel for the appellant as
well as Mr. Saumya Rai, learned Deputy Government Advocate
appearing for the State/respondent.
2
2 Today, the matter is listed for hearing on IA No. 2 of 2024, which is
an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the
appellant. However, with the consent of learned counsel
appearing for the parties, we proceed to hear the matter on
merits.
3 The appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 374(2) of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, the Cr.P.C.)
questioning the judgment of conviction and order of sentence
dated 01.11.2023 passed in Sessions Case No. 31/2022 by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTSC, Shakti, District- Janjgir-
Champa (C.G.), by which the appellant has been convicted as
under:
Conviction Sentence
Under Section 376(1) R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs.1,000/-,
of the IPC. in default of payment of fine amount,
additional R.I. for 06 months.
Under Section 376(2) Imprisonment for life till natural death
(l)(m) of the IPC. and fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of
payment of fine amount, additional R.I.
for 01 year.
Under Section 376(A) Imprisonment for life till natural death
of the IPC. and fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of
payment of fine additional R.I. for 01
year.
Under Section 302 of Imprisonment for life till natural death
the IPC and fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of
payment of fine additional R.I. for 06
months.
All the sentences were directed to run concurrently
3
4 The prosecution case, in brief, is that the deceased was a
mentally unstable woman aged about 55 years, who used to
reside in a vacant shed situated near Vimal Kirana Store and
survived by wandering around Dabhra Chowk. She was
occasionally provided food and water by one Radhabai Sidar. Her
parents had predeceased her, and she had no known guardian.
5 On 05.04.2022, at about 11:30 a.m., the informant Dhaneshwar
Chauhan, a volunteer at Community Health Centre (CHC),
Dabhra, submitted a written report along with a hospital intimation
issued by Dr. K.K. Sidar, Medical Officer, CHC, Dabhra, regarding
the unnatural death of an unidentified woman. On the basis of the
said information, merg intimation No. 22/2022 was registered
under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and inquiry
was set into motion.
6 During the course of inquiry, CCTV footage obtained from Vimal
Kirana Store revealed that in the intervening night of
04/05.04.2022, at about 1:00 a.m., the appellant/accused Kishan
Yadav was seen apprehending the deceased and dragging her
towards a secluded place near the house of Radhabai Sidar. The
footage further disclosed that at about 2:00 a.m., the accused was
dragging the deceased by her hair and thereafter assaulted her by
forcefully striking her head against a stone and delivering blows
on her face, particularly near the eye region. As a consequence of
4
such assault, the deceased sustained grievous injuries, leading to
brain hemorrhage and excessive intracranial bleeding, ultimately
resulting in her death at about 10:30 a.m. on 05.04.2022.
7 The deceased was transported in an injured condition to CHC,
Dabhra, by a 108 ambulance, where she was declared dead upon
examination. Upon spot inspection, analysis of CCTV footage,
and recording of statements of nearby residents during the
inquest proceedings, a formal FIR was registered against the
accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the
Indian Penal Code.
8 During investigation, the Investigating Officer prepared the spot
map and conducted inquest proceedings. The post-mortem
examination of the deceased was carried out at CHC, Dabhra.
The accused, in his memorandum statement (Ex.P-3), disclosed
that he had forcibly committed sexual intercourse with the
deceased, and when she resisted, he assaulted her by punching
her on the face and eyes and thereafter intentionally struck her
head against a stone with the intention to cause her death. He
further stated that he inserted an iron rod into the private parts of
the deceased, causing severe internal injuries and bleeding, and
thereafter fled from the spot under the impression that she had
died.
9 Pursuant to the said memorandum, several incriminating articles
were seized, including blood-stained stones, plain stones, clothing
5
articles, an iron rod, and other materials from the scene of
occurrence. CCTV footage and still photographs capturing the
accused dragging the deceased were also seized. Biological
samples, including semen slides and clothing of the accused,
were collected and sent for forensic examination. The DVR and
relevant registers were also seized, and cyber forensic analysis
was conducted. The FSL reports corroborated the prosecution
case.
10 Upon completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against
the accused for offences punishable under Sections 302, 376,
376(2)(l)(m), and 376A of the Indian Penal Code before the
learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dabhra, who committed
the case to the Court of Sessions for trial.
11 The learned Trial Court framed charges against the accused
under Sections 376(1), 376(2)(l)(m), 376(A), and 302 of the Indian
Penal Code. The contents of the charges were read over and
explained to the accused, who denied the same and claimed to be
tried.
12 In his examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, the accused denied all incriminating circumstances
appearing against him in the prosecution evidence and pleaded
innocence. He, however, did not choose to adduce any evidence
in defence.
6
13 The trial Court upon appreciation of oral and documentary
evidence available on record, by its judgment dated 01.11.2023,
convicted the appellant for offences under Sections 376(1), 376(2)
(l)(m), 376(A) and 302 of the IPC and sentenced them as
aforementioned, against which, this criminal appeal has been
filed.
14 Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the
judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the
learned Trial Court are contrary to law and facts on record and,
therefore, unsustainable. It is contended that the prosecution has
failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt, and the
findings recorded by the Trial Court suffer from serious infirmities
arising out of misappreciation of evidence. It is further urged that
the learned Court below has not properly considered the
circumstances existing prior to and at the time of the alleged
incident, thereby vitiating the conclusions drawn. Emphasis is laid
on the fact that the present case is devoid of any direct ocular
evidence, and the conviction has been primarily based upon
CCTV footage, which, according to the appellant, has not been
duly proved in accordance with law nor conclusively establishes
the guilt of the accused. It is also submitted that the Trial Court
has failed to properly appreciate the evidence brought on record,
including material omissions and contradictions elicited during
cross-examination of prosecution witnesses. The conviction, it is
argued, rests merely on conjectures and surmises rather than on
7
cogent and reliable evidence. Learned counsel further contends
that none of the prosecution witnesses have fully supported the
prosecution story in material particulars, and despite such
deficiencies, the Trial Court has erroneously ignored these vital
aspects and proceeded to convict the appellant, which, in the
submission of the appellant, renders the impugned judgment
liable to be set aside.
15 On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State
vehemently contends that the prosecution has succeeded in
establishing the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt
by leading cogent, reliable and unimpeachable evidence, forming
a complete and unbroken chain of circumstances. It is submitted
that the case, though based on circumstantial evidence, fully
satisfies the settled principles laid down in Sharad Birdhichand
Sarda v. State of Maharashtra, inasmuch as each incriminating
circumstance has been firmly proved and all such circumstances,
when taken cumulatively, point unerringly towards the guilt of the
accused and exclude every possible hypothesis consistent with
innocence. It is further submitted that the “last seen” evidence
supported by CCTV footage, duly proved through electronic
evidence in compliance with Section 65-B of the Evidence Act,
clearly establishes that the deceased was last seen alive in the
company of the accused, who was seen dragging her in a brutal
manner in the dead of night. The authenticity of such electronic
evidence stands fortified by the Cyber Forensic Laboratory report,
8
thereby eliminating any possibility of fabrication or tampering. The
prosecution further relies upon the admissible portion of the
memorandum statement under Section 27 of the Evidence Act,
pursuant to which the recovery of blood-stained clothes and the
iron rod being the weapon of offence was effected at the instance
of the accused, thus constituting a highly incriminating
circumstance linking the accused directly with the commission of
the crime.
16 It is further submitted that the medical and forensic evidence
lends complete corroboration to the ocular and circumstantial
evidence on record. The testimony of the medical expert
conclusively establishes that the deceased sustained grievous
injuries, including rupture of uterus and fatal head injuries, which
are consistent with forcible sexual assault and homicidal violence.
The presence of human blood on the seized articles, including the
weapon and clothes of the accused, as confirmed by the FSL
report, further strengthens the prosecution case, particularly in the
absence of any explanation from the accused under Section 106
of the Evidence Act. Learned State counsel submits that the
barbaric nature of the act, coupled with the vulnerability of the
victim and the brutality inflicted, squarely brings the case within
the category of heinous offences warranting strict judicial
response. Accordingly, it is prayed that this Court be pleased to
hold the accused guilty for the offences charged and impose
punishment commensurate with the gravity and brutality of the
9
crime.
17 We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties,
considered their rival submissions made herein-above and also
went through the records with utmost circumspection.
18 The first question for consideration would be whether the
deceased died under unnatural circumstances ?
19 In order to adjudicate the present point, this Court has undertaken
a detailed scrutiny of the ocular evidence of prosecution
witnesses (PWs), duly corroborated by documentary exhibits
(Exhibits) and medical evidence.
20 At the outset, the prosecution has examined several independent
witnesses who have consistently deposed regarding the condition
in which the deceased was found on the morning of 05.04.2022.
21 Roop Singh Chandra (PW-1), an independent witness acquainted
with the deceased, has categorically stated that the deceased
was a mentally unstable woman living alone and was found lying
near the house of Radhabai (PW-2) in a grievously injured
condition. He has specifically deposed that blood was oozing from
her head as well as from below her waist and that it appeared that
someone had crushed her head with a stone. He further stated
that the deceased was taken to the hospital through a 108
ambulance and was later declared dead. Notably, this witness has
withstood the test of cross-examination, and no material
contradiction or omission has been elicited so as to discredit his
10
testimony.
22 Similarly, Radhabai (PW-2), in whose vicinity the deceased was
found, has deposed that on 05.04.2022 at about 6:30 a.m., she
noticed the deceased lying on a stone, groaning in pain, with
blood coming out from her private parts and being unable to
speak. She immediately informed Sudarshan (PW-6), following
which the deceased was shifted to the hospital. Her testimony,
being natural and proximate to the place of occurrence, carries
significant evidentiary value and has remained unshaken in cross-
examination.
23 Rajeshwari Singh (PW-3) has also corroborated the prosecution
case by stating that the deceased was found lying near her house
with bleeding head injuries and swelling near the eye. She
confirmed that the deceased was in a serious condition and was
later taken to the hospital, where she succumbed to her injuries.
24 Bhim Yadav (PW-4) and Sudarshan Prasad (PW-6) have further
supported the prosecution version by stating that the deceased
was found lying in a pool of blood with injuries on her head and
waist region, and that arrangements were made to shift her to the
hospital through the 108 ambulance service.
25 Damyanti Bai (PW-11) has also corroborated the above facts by
stating that the deceased was lying near Radhabai’s house in a
blood-stained condition and was taken to the hospital by the
ambulance. Importantly, the testimonies of all these witnesses are
11
consistent, natural, and free from material contradictions, and they
have remained uncontroverted in cross-examination, thereby
lending strong credence to the prosecution case.
26 The evidence of Uday Singh Ratre (PW-12), driver of the 108
ambulance, and Manas Khunte (PW-13), further fortifies the
prosecution case. They have stated that upon receiving
information, they reached the spot and found the deceased in an
injured condition with visible bleeding injuries and transported her
to the Community Health Centre, Dabhra. Their testimony
establishes the continuity of events from the place of occurrence
to the hospital.
27 The documentary evidence in the form of hospital intimation
report (Ex.P-18) and merg intimation (Ex.P-20) assumes
importance. From these exhibits, it is evident that on 05.04.2022
at about 10:30 a.m., information regarding the death of an
unknown woman was communicated by Dr. K.K. Sidar (PW-10) to
the police through hospital staff Dhaneshwar Chauhan (PW-14).
This clearly establishes that the deceased was brought to the
hospital in an injured condition and was declared dead upon
arrival.
28 Aditya Pratap Singh (PW-15), the Investigating Officer, has
proved the inquest proceedings vide notice Ex.P-21 and inquest
panchnama Ex.P-22. He has further proved the application for
postmortem (Ex.P-13), thereby establishing due compliance with
12
procedural requirements.
29 The most decisive evidence is the medical evidence adduced
through Dr. K.K. Sidar (PW-10), who conducted the postmortem
examination of the deceased. The postmortem report (Ex.P-14)
reveals the following crucial findings:
* Multiple lacerated wounds on the head, including injuries
measuring approximately 3×2×1 inches and 4×2×1 inches.
* Fracture of the skull bone at the posterior region with
inward depression.
* Presence of blood clots and hemorrhage in the brain.
* Severe contusion and swelling around the left eye.
* Bleeding from the mouth with deformation of upper jaw.
* Multiple injuries to the genital region, including scratches
and continuous bleeding.
* Rupture of the uterus, indicative of grievous internal
trauma.
30 The doctor has categorically opined that all injuries were ante-
mortem in nature and caused by hard and blunt objects. The
cause of death has been opined as brain hemorrhage due to head
injury, and the antecedent cause as traumatic assault. Most
importantly, the doctor has unequivocally opined that the nature of
death was homicidal. The postmortem report (Ex.P-14) fully
corroborates the ocular evidence and remains unshaken in cross-
13
examination. The suggestion put by the defence regarding
accidental injury (such as a vehicular accident) has been
specifically denied by the medical expert.
31 Upon cumulative consideration of the consistent testimonies of
PWs 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 11, duly corroborated by PWs 12 and 13
regarding the immediate aftermath, and further substantiated by
documentary evidence (Ex.P-18, Ex.P-20, Ex.P-21, Ex.P-22,
Ex.P-13) and the conclusive medical evidence (Ex.P-14), this
Court finds that the prosecution has successfully established that
the deceased sustained multiple grievous ante-mortem injuries
caused by external force.
32 The nature, multiplicity, and severity of injuries, particularly the
skull fracture and genital trauma, unequivocally rule out any
possibility of natural or accidental death. The medical opinion
clearly attributes the cause of death to violent assault.
33 Accordingly, this Court holds that the prosecution has proved
beyond reasonable doubt that the death of the deceased was
unnatural and homicidal in nature.
34 Now, the question for consideration would be whether on the
intervening night of 04/05.04.2022 between 01:00 a.m. to 02:00
a.m., at the place situated near the house of Radhabai Sidar in
village Dabhra, within the jurisdiction of Police Station Dabhra, the
accused committed forcible sexual assault/rape upon the
deceased, who was a woman of unsound mind and incapable of
14
giving valid consent, by penetrating his penis or inserting any
object, including a rod, into her private parts against her will and
without her consent, and in the course of the same transaction,
caused grievous injuries and ultimately her death by assaulting
her and striking her head against a stone, thereby committing
offences punishable under Sections 376, 376(2), 376A and 302 of
the Indian Penal Code?
35 In the present case, admittedly there is no direct ocular evidence
to the occurrence and the prosecution case rests entirely on
circumstantial evidence. It is well settled that in cases based on
circumstantial evidence, each circumstance relied upon by the
prosecution must be fully established, and all such circumstances
must form a complete chain pointing unerringly towards the guilt
of the accused and excluding every hypothesis consistent with his
innocence. In this regard, the principles laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of
Maharashtra1 are required to be borne in mind. It is equally
settled that though motive assumes importance in such cases,
failure to prove motive is not always fatal where the chain of
circumstances is otherwise complete and convincing.
36 Keeping the aforesaid principles in view, this Court proceeds to
evaluate the circumstantial evidence adduced by the prosecution,
which primarily consists of (i) last seen together, (ii) electronic
evidence in the form of CCTV footage, (iii) identification of the
1 (1984) 4 SCC 116
15
accused, and (iv) corroboration by medical evidence.
Last Seen Together and Seizure of CCTV Footage
37 Aditya Pratap Singh, Sub-Inspector (PW-15), has deposed that
during the inquest proceedings in Merg No. 22/2022, after
receiving information from the Community Health Centre, Dabhra,
he prepared the inquest panchnama (Ex.P-22). During such
proceedings, upon inquiry from local witnesses, he came to know
about the existence of CCTV footage installed at Vimal Kirana
Store. On viewing the footage of the intervening night of
04/05.04.2022 between 01:30 a.m. to 02:30 a.m., it was revealed
that the accused was seen dragging the deceased and assaulting
her. On the basis of such material, FIR (Ex.P-24) came to be
registered against the accused.
38 The said witness (PW-15) has further proved that he seized two
32 GB pen drives containing CCTV footage and four photographs
depicting the accused dragging the deceased, vide seizure memo
(Ex.P-4). Despite lengthy cross-examination, nothing material has
been elicited to discredit the seizure, and the suggestion that no
such seizure was made has been specifically denied.
39 Saurabh Agarwal (PW-5), the owner of Vimal Kirana Store, has
corroborated the prosecution case by stating that he downloaded
the CCTV footage of the relevant time period and handed over the
same to the police, which was seized vide Ex.P-4. He has further
16
stated that the CCTV system consisted of multiple cameras
capable of recording even during night hours and that the footage
was stored in a DVR with hard disk. Though he stated that he
signed the certificate under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act
(Ex.P-19) at the instance of police, the contents thereof have not
been challenged in cross-examination, nor has any suggestion of
tampering been substantiated.
40 The seizure of CCTV footage is further corroborated by Roop
Singh (PW-1), who has clearly stated that the police seized pen
drives and photographs from Saurabh Agarwal, and his signatures
appear on Ex.P-4. Though Lalit Kewat (PW-20) turned partially
hostile, the seizure stands independently proved by the consistent
testimony of PW-1 and PW-5.
41 It has further come in evidence that the original DVR and hard
disk of the CCTV system were seized vide seizure memo (Ex.P-
5), as proved by PW-15 and Station House Officer Derharam
Tandon (PW-19), and corroborated by witnesses PW-1 and PW-4.
The seized DVR has been marked as Article-8.
Identification of Accused and Authenticity of CCTV Footage
42 The prosecution has further established identification of the
accused and the deceased in the CCTV footage through
identification panchnamas (Ex.P-6 and Ex.P-7). Roop Singh (PW-
1) has categorically stated that upon viewing the footage and
17
photographs, he identified the deceased as well as the accused
Kishan Yadav. His testimony has remained unshaken in cross-
examination.
43 Radhabai (PW-2) has also identified the deceased in the CCTV
footage, though she expressed inability to identify the accused.
However, considering that both witnesses were well acquainted
with the deceased, there remains no doubt that the woman seen
in the footage was the deceased.
44 The prosecution has further strengthened its case by obtaining
photographs of the accused after his arrest, which were proved
through panchnama (Ex.P-12) by PW-19 and corroborated by
witnesses PW-7 and PW-24, as well as photographer Pankaj
Sahu (PW-9). These photographs (Articles 2-6 and 13-17) were
used for comparison with the CCTV footage.
Forensic Examination of Electronic Evidence
45 The electronic evidence has been duly examined by the Cyber
Forensic Lab, Police Headquarters, Raipur. Vikram Dhruv (PW-
30), Cyber Expert, has proved the examination report (Ex.P-40)
and certificate under Section 65-B (Ex.P-41). As per his report:
* The footage retrieved from the original DVR (Exhibit-A /
Article-8) contains video of the incident,
* The footage in the pen drive (Exhibit-C) matches the original
DVR footage,
18* The person appearing in the CCTV footage is identical to the
accused as per photographic comparison (Exhibit-D).
46 Though in cross-examination the expert stated that it is not
possible to conclusively rule out tampering, he clarified that no
tampering was found in the retrieved footage. Thus, the integrity
and authenticity of the electronic evidence stands established.
Last Seen Circumstance
47 Upon perusal of the CCTV footage (Exhibit-C and Article-18), as
well as the original DVR (Article-8), it is clearly established that at
about 02:12 a.m., the accused was seen holding the deceased
with both hands and dragging her out of the range of the CCTV
camera. This fact has been duly noticed by the Trial Court and
also verified by this Court.
48 It is further established from the testimony of Radhabai (PW-2)
and other witnesses that at about 06:30 a.m., the deceased was
found lying in an injured condition near the place of occurrence.
Thus, the time gap between the deceased being last seen with
the accused and her being found grievously injured is minimal.
49 In this regard, in the judgment in Dharamdev Yadav v. State of
U.P. 2014 (5) SCC 509, it has been said that if there is a time gap
between the time when the accused and the deceased were last
seen together and the deceased was found dead, then when the
time gap is found, then the accused is not guilty of the crime. If
19
the gap is small, then in such a situation the possibility that
anybody other than the accused could have committed the crime
would be less. However, in such cases it would be hazardous to
come to a conclusion of guilt in cases where there is no other
positive evidence to conclude that the accused and the deceased
were last seen together.
50 Similarly, while referring to the judgment in Bodhraj v. State of
Jammu and Kashmir 2002 (8) SC/ST 45, the Hon’ble Supreme
Court said that the last seen theory comes into play where time –
gap between the point of time when the accused and the
deceased were last seen alive and the deceased is found dead is
so small that possibility of any person other than the accused
being the author of the crime becomes impossible.
51 Elaborating the principle of “last seen alive” in State of
Rajasthan vs. Kashi Ram, (2006) 12 SCC 254, the Court held as
under:-
“23. It is not necessary to multiply with authorities.
The principle is well settled. The provisions of
Section 106 of the Evidence Act itself are
unambiguous and categoric in laying down that
when any fact is especially within the knowledge of
a person, the burden of proving that fact is upon
him. Thus, if a person is last seen with the
deceased, he must offer an explanation as to how
and when he parted company. He must furnish an
explanation which appears to the court to be
probable and satisfactory. If he does so he must be
20held to have discharged his burden. If he fails to
offer an explanation on the basis of facts within his
special knowledge, he fails to discharge the burden
cast upon him by Section 106 of the Evidence Act.
In a case resting on circumstantial evidence if the
accused fails to offer a reasonable explanation in
discharge of the burden placed on him, that itself
provides an additional link in the chain of
circumstances proved against him. Section 106
does not shift the burden of proof in a criminal trial,
which is always upon the prosecution. It lays down
the rule that when the accused does not throw any
light upon facts which are specially within his
knowledge and which could not support any theory
or hypothesis compatible with his innocence, the
court can consider his failure to adduce any
explanation, as an additional link which completes
the chain.”
Failure of the Accused to Explain (Section 106 Evidence Act)
52 In view of the above, since the deceased was last seen alive in
the exclusive company of the accused, the burden shifted upon
the accused under Section 106 of the Evidence Act to explain the
circumstances in which the deceased sustained fatal injuries.
53 However, in his statement under Section 313 CrPC, the accused
merely denied the allegations and failed to offer any plausible
explanation. His vague plea that the CCTV footage was false and
manipulated has remained unsubstantiated. Such failure to
explain constitutes an additional incriminating circumstance
21
against him.
Medical Corroboration
54 The medical evidence of Dr. K.K. Sidar (PW-10) (Ex.P-14) clearly
establishes that the deceased sustained grievous head injuries
leading to brain hemorrhage, along with severe injuries to her
genital organs, including rupture of uterus. All injuries were ante-
mortem and caused by hard and blunt objects, and the nature of
death was homicidal. This medical evidence fully corroborates the
prosecution case and the circumstances emerging from the CCTV
footage.
55 From the cumulative appreciation of the evidence of PWs 1, 2, 4,
5, 15, 19, and 30, along with documentary evidence Ex.P-4, Ex.P-
5, Ex.P-6, Ex.P-7, Ex.P-12, Ex.P-19, Ex.P-40, Ex.P-41, and the
medical report Ex.P-14, this Court is of the considered view that
the prosecution has successfully established the “last seen
together” circumstance and the authenticity of the CCTV
evidence.
56 The chain of circumstances is complete and unbroken, leading to
the only irresistible conclusion that it was the accused who was
last seen with the deceased and who caused the injuries leading
to her death. The prosecution has thus proved this circumstance
beyond reasonable doubt.
Circumstance of Memorandum under Section 27 of the
22
Evidence Act and Recovery of Incriminating Articles.
57 In the present case, the prosecution has relied upon the
memorandum statement of the accused recorded under Section
27 of the Indian Evidence Act and the consequential recovery of
incriminating articles.
58 In this regard, Derharam Tandon, Inspector (PW-19), has
deposed that after taking the accused Kishan Yadav into custody,
he recorded his memorandum statement on 09.04.2022 at Police
Station Dabhra, which is proved as Ex.P-3. In the said
memorandum, the accused disclosed in detail the manner of
commission of the offence, stating that on the intervening night of
04/05.04.2022, at about 01:30 a.m., he noticed the deceased
sleeping in the verandah of Vimal Kirana Store and thereafter,
when the place became deserted, he dragged her by her hair to a
secluded place near Murli Lodge. He further disclosed that he
forcibly committed sexual intercourse with her and, upon
resistance, assaulted her by fists, inserted an iron rod into her
private parts, and thereafter struck her head repeatedly against a
stone, believing her to be dead before fleeing from the spot. He
also stated that he had concealed the clothes worn by him and
the iron rod used in the commission of the offence in bushes near
the canal bridge and could get the same recovered. The
memorandum Ex.P-3 bears the signatures of the witness as well
as the accused.
23
59 Acting upon the information furnished by the accused in his
memorandum, PW-19 has further deposed that on 09.04.2022 at
about 09:30 a.m., the accused led the police party and witnesses
to the place indicated by him, i.e., bushes near Shamshan Road
Canal Par, Dabhra, and got recovered the incriminating articles,
namely: (i) one full shirt with red and white stripes stained with
blood, (ii) one black jeans pant with white shade, torn in front and
stained with blood, and (iii) one iron rod having a nut at one end
and stained with blood. The said articles were seized vide seizure
memo Ex.P-2, which bears the signatures of the witness and the
accused. The witness has categorically denied in cross-
examination the suggestion that the memorandum was fabricated
or that the recovery was not effected at the instance of the
accused.
60 The testimony of PW-19 finds substantial corroboration from
independent witnesses. Roop Singh Chandra (PW-1), who is a
witness to both memorandum (Ex.P-3) and seizure (Ex.P-2), has
clearly deposed that the accused, in his presence, disclosed the
manner in which he committed the offence and stated that he had
concealed the rod and clothes near the canal bridge. He further
stated that the police, acting on such disclosure, proceeded to the
said place along with the accused and recovered the iron rod and
blood-stained clothes, which were seized and sealed in his
presence. His signatures on Ex.P-2 and Ex.P-3 have been duly
proved. In cross-examination, this witness has firmly denied the
24
suggestion that he had signed the documents at the police station
or that the recovery was not effected in his presence, thereby
lending credibility to the prosecution case.
61 Similarly, Bhim Yadav (PW-4), another independent witness to the
memorandum and seizure, has corroborated the prosecution
version by stating that after the arrest of the accused, he was
present when the accused disclosed before the police that he had
committed rape upon the deceased and caused injuries by
inserting a rod and striking her head. He further stated that the
accused informed the police about concealing the rod and clothes
in bushes near the canal bridge and led the police party to the
said place, from where the articles were recovered and seized
vide Ex.P-2. His signatures on the memorandum (Ex.P-3) and
seizure memo (Ex.P-2) have been duly proved. Despite cross-
examination, no material contradiction has been elicited to
discredit his testimony.
62 From the consistent and cogent evidence of PW-19, duly
corroborated by independent witnesses PW-1 and PW-4, it stands
established that the accused, while in police custody, voluntarily
made a disclosure statement leading to the discovery of
incriminating articles. The recovery of blood-stained clothes and
the iron rod at the instance of the accused is a relevant fact under
Section 27 of the Evidence Act and constitutes a strong
incriminating circumstance against him.
25
63 It is significant to note that the articles so recovered are directly
connected with the commission of the offence, particularly the iron
rod, which corresponds with the nature of injuries found on the
private parts of the deceased as per medical evidence (Ex.P-14).
The recovery of blood-stained clothes further lends corroboration
to the prosecution case and strengthens the chain of
circumstances.
64 The defence has failed to elicit any material contradiction or
infirmity in the evidence relating to the memorandum and
recovery. The mere suggestion that the memorandum was
fabricated or that the recovery was planted has not been
substantiated by any cogent evidence. On the contrary, the
prosecution witnesses have consistently supported the recovery
proceedings.
65 Thus, this Court finds that the prosecution has successfully
proved that pursuant to the memorandum statement (Ex.P-3)
made by the accused, incriminating articles, namely blood-stained
clothes and iron rod (Ex.P-2), were recovered at his instance from
a concealed place known only to him. This circumstance forms a
vital link in the chain of circumstantial evidence.
66 Accordingly, it is held that the prosecution has proved beyond
reasonable doubt that the recovery of incriminating articles at the
instance of the accused under Section 27 of the Evidence Act is
genuine and reliable, and the same further connects the accused
26
with the commission of the offence, thereby strengthening the
prosecution case.
Motive and Medical/Forensic Corroboration
67 The prosecution has asserted that the accused was driven by the
motive of satisfying his sexual lust and, upon resistance by the
deceased, committed her brutal murder. The surrounding
circumstances, including the CCTV footage, medical evidence,
and conduct of the accused, clearly establish such motive.
68 The CCTV footage (Exhibits A, B, C) retrieved from the DVR of
Vimal Kirana Store, duly proved by PW-30 (Cyber Expert) and
supported by certificate under Section 65-B (Ex.P.-41), clearly
depicts the accused dragging the deceased in a helpless
condition. The footage, corroborated by independent witnesses
and forensic examination, establishes the conduct of the accused
immediately prior to the commission of the crime.
69 The medical evidence of Dr. K.K. Sidar (PW-10), particularly
Ex.P.-17, reveals the presence of scratch marks on the chest of
the accused, which strongly corroborates the prosecution case
that the deceased resisted the assault. These injuries on the
accused are consistent with the prosecution story and further
establish the occurrence of a violent struggle.
70 The doctor was also queried vide Ex.P.-34 regarding the nature of
injuries and the possibility of their being caused by the seized iron
27
rod. In response, the doctor opined that the injuries to the private
parts of the deceased could have been caused by the seized rod
and that the blood stains on the rod and clothes could be human
blood, subject to chemical examination.
71 This medical opinion conclusively links the seized weapon (iron
rod) with the injuries sustained by the deceased, thereby
establishing a direct nexus between the accused, the weapon,
and the crime.
72 Further, the seizure of blood-stained concrete pieces from the
spot vide Ex.P.-8, duly proved by PW-2 and PW-3, corroborates
the prosecution case that the deceased’s head was struck against
a hard surface, causing fatal injuries.
73 The FSL report (Ex.P.-38) confirms the presence of human blood
on the iron rod, the clothes of the accused, and the stone pieces
recovered from the spot. The accused has failed to offer any
explanation under Section 313 CrPC regarding the presence of
blood on his clothes, which constitutes an additional incriminating
circumstance.
74 The medical examination of the accused (PW-10) further
establishes that he was physically capable of performing sexual
intercourse, thereby ruling out any defence to the contrary.
75 The contention of the defence regarding absence of spermatozoa
is devoid of merit in view of the statutory definition of rape under
28
Section 375 IPC, which clearly includes insertion of any object
into the vagina. The medical evidence clearly establishes rupture
of uterus and grievous injuries to the genitalia, which conclusively
prove penetration by a foreign object.
76 In the present case, the manner in which the offence has been
committed by subjecting the deceased, a helpless and mentally
unsound woman, to brutal sexual assault, inserting a rod into her
private parts and thereafter causing fatal injuries clearly reflects
extreme depravity and inhuman conduct. The Hon’ble Supreme
Court in the judgment of Mukesh v. State (NCT of Delhi),
reported in (2017) 6 SCC has held that such barbaric acts,
involving brutal sexual violence and physical torture, shock the
collective conscience of society and fall within the gravest
category of offences. It has further been held that rape is not
merely a crime against an individual but against society at large,
and where the victim is vulnerable and incapable of resistance,
the offence assumes aggravated proportions. The medical
evidence in the present case, showing grievous injuries to the
private parts and head of the deceased, further corroborates the
prosecution case and establishes the brutal nature of the assault.
Relevant paras of the judgment are reproduced herein-below:
“363. Now, we shall focus on the nature of the crime and
manner in which it has been committed. The submission
of Mr. Luthra, learned senior counsel, is that the present
case amounts to devastation of social trust and
29completely destroys the collective balance and invites the
indignation of the society. It is submitted by him that that a
crime of this nature creates a fear psychosis and definitely
falls in the category of rarest of the rare cases.
364. It is necessary to state here that in the instant case,
the brutal, barbaric and diabolic nature of the crime is
evincible from the acts committed by the accused
persons, viz., the assault on the informant, PW-1 with iron
rod and tearing off his clothes; assaulting the informant
and the deceased with hands, kicks and iron rod and
robbing them of their personal belongings like debit cards,
ring, informant’s shoes, etc.; attacking the deceased by
forcibly disrobing her and committing violent sexual
assault by all the appellants; their brutish behaviour in
having anal sex with the deceased and forcing her to
perform oral sex; injuries on the body of the deceased by
way of bite marks (10 in number); and insertion of rod in
her private parts that, inter alia, caused perforation of her
intestine which caused sepsis and, ultimately, led to her
death. The medical history of the prosecutrix (as proved in
the record in Ex. PW-50/A and Ex. PW-50) demonstrates
that the entire intestine of the prosecutrix was perforated
and splayed open due to the repeated insertion of the rod
and hands; and the appellants had pulled out the internal
organs of the prosecutrix in the most savage and inhuman
manner that caused grave injuries which ultimately
annihilated her life. As has been established, the
prosecutrix sustained various bite marks which were
observed on her face, lips, jaws, near ear, on the right and
left breast, left upper arm, right lower limb, right inner
groin, right lower thigh, left thigh lateral, left lower anterior
and genitals. These acts itself demonstrate the mental
perversion and inconceivable brutality as caused by the
30appellants. As further proven, they threw the informant
and the deceased victim on the road in a cold winter
night. After throwing the informant and the deceased
victim, the convicts tried to run the bus over them so that
there would be no evidence against them. They made all
possible efforts in destroying the evidence by, inter alia,
washing the bus and burning the clothes of the deceased
and after performing the gruesome act, they divided the
loot among themselves.
365. As we have narrated the incident that has been
corroborated by the medical evidence, oral testimony and
the dying declarations, it is absolutely obvious that the
accused persons had found an object for enjoyment in her
and, as is evident, they were obsessed with the singular
purpose sans any feeling to ravish her as they liked, treat
her as they felt and, if we allow ourselves to say, the
gross sadistic and beastly instinctual pleasures came to
the forefront when they, after ravishing her, thought it to
be just a matter of routine to throw her alongwith her
friend out of the bus and crush them. The casual manner
with which she was treated and the devilish manner in
which they played with her identity and dignity is humanly
inconceivable. It sounds like a story from a different world
where humanity has been treated with irreverence. The
appetite for sex, the hunger for violence, the position of
the empowered and the attitude of perversity, to say the
least, are bound to shock the collective conscience which
knows not what to do. It is manifest that the wanton lust,
the servility to absolutely unchained carnal desire and
slavery to the loathsome beastility of passion ruled the
mindset of the appellants to commit a crime which can
summon with immediacy “tsunami” of shock in the mind of
the collective and destroy the civilised marrows of the
31milieu in entirety.
366. When we cautiously, consciously and anxiously
weigh the aggravating circumstances and the mitigating
factors, we are compelled to arrive at the singular
conclusion that the aggravating circumstances outweigh
the mitigating circumstances now brought on record.
Therefore, we conclude and hold that the High Court has
correctly confirmed the death penalty and we see no
reason to differ with the same.”
77 The evidence on record also establishes that the deceased was a
mentally unsound and vulnerable woman, as deposed by PW-2
and other witnesses, and therefore incapable of giving valid
consent, bringing the case squarely within aggravated
circumstances.
Conclusion on Chain of Circumstances
78 From the aforesaid discussion, the following chain of
circumstances stands fully established:
* The death of the deceased was homicidal.
* The accused was last seen with the deceased in CCTV
footage at 2:12 AM.
* The deceased was found grievously injured within a short
time thereafter.
* The accused made a disclosure statement leading to
recovery of incriminating articles (Ex.P.-2 & Ex.P.-3).
32
* The recovered articles were found stained with human blood
(Ex.P.-38).
* Medical evidence confirms injuries consistent with the
prosecution case.
* The accused failed to explain incriminating circumstances
under Section 313 CrPC.
79 The chain of circumstantial evidence is complete and unbroken,
leading only to the hypothesis of guilt of the accused and ruling
out any possibility of innocence.
80 We may also make a reference to a decision of the Supreme
Court in C. Chenga Reddy and Ors. v. State of A.P., (1996) 10
SCC 193, wherein it has been observed thus:
“In a case based on circumstantial evidence, the
settled law is that the circumstances from which the
conclusion of guilt is drawn should be fully proved
and such circumstances must be conclusive in
nature. Moreover, all the circumstances should be
complete and there should be no gap left in the chain
of evidence. Further the proved circumstances must
be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of
the accused and totally inconsistent with his
innocence….”.
81 In Padala Veera Reddy v. State of A.P. and Ors., AIR 1990 SC
79, it was laid down by the Supreme Court that when a case rests
upon circumstantial evidence, such evidence must satisfy the
following tests:
33
“(1) the circumstances from which an inference of
guilt is sought to be drawn, must be cogently and
firmly established;
(2) those circumstances should be of a definite
tendency unerringly pointing towards guilt of the
accused;
(3) the circumstances, taken cumulatively should
form a chain so complete that there is no escape
from the conclusion that within all human probability
the crime was committed by the accused and none
else; and(4) the circumstantial evidence in order to sustain
conviction must be complete and incapable of
explanation of any other hypothesis than that of the
guilt of the accused and such evidence should not
only be consistent with the guilt of the accused but
should be inconsistent with his innocence.”
82 In State of U.P. v. Ashok Kumar Srivastava, (1992 Crl.LJ 1104),
it was pointed out by the Supreme Court that great care must be
taken in evaluating circumstantial evidence and if the evidence
relied on is reasonably capable of two inferences, the one in
favour of the accused must be accepted. It was also pointed out
that the circumstances relied upon must be found to have been
fully established and the cumulative effect of all the facts so
established must be consistent only with the hypothesis of guilt.
83 Sir Alfred Wills in his admirable book “Wills’ Circumstantial
Evidence” (Chapter VI) lays down the following rules specially to
be observed in the case of circumstantial evidence: (1) the facts
34
alleged as the basis of any legal inference must be clearly proved
and beyond reasonable doubt connected with the factum
probandum; (2) the burden of proof is always on the party who
asserts the existence of any fact, which infers legal accountability;
(3) in all cases, whether of direct or circumstantial evidence the
best evidence must be adduced which the nature of the case
admits; (4) in order to justify the inference of guilt, the inculpatory
facts must be incompatible with the innocence of the accused and
incapable of explanation, upon any other reasonable hypothesis
than that of his guilt, (5) if there be any reasonable doubt of the
guilt of the accused, he is entitled as of right to be acquitted”.
84 Five golden principles which constitute Panchseel of proof of case
based on circumstantial evidence have been laid down by the
Supreme Court in the matter of Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v.
State of Maharashtra, (1984) 4 SCC 116 which state as under :-
“(1) the circumstances from which the conclusion of
guilt is to be drawn should be fully established. The
circumstances concerned “must” or “should” and not
“may be” established;
(2) the facts so established should be consistent only
with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, that is
to say, they should not be explainable on any other
hypothesis except that the accused is guilty;
(3) the circumstances should be of a conclusive
nature and tendency;
35
(4) they should exclude every possible hypothesis
except the one to be proved; and(5) there must be a chain of evidence so complete as
not to leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion
consistent with the innocence of the accused and
must show that in all human probability the act must
have been done by the accused.”
85 The Supreme Court in the matter of Suresh and Another v State
of Haryana, (2018) 18 SCC 654 has observed that cases of
circumstantial evidence, the courts are called upon to make
inferences from the available evidence, which may lead to the
accused’s guilt. The court at paras 41 and 42 has observed thus :
“41. The aforesaid tests are aptly referred as
Panchsheel of proof in Circumstantial Cases (refer to
Prakash v. State of Rajasthan). The expectation is
that the prosecution case should reflect careful
portrayal of the factual circumstances and inferences
thereof and their compatibility with a singular
hypothesis wherein all the intermediate facts and the
case itself are proved beyond reasonable doubt.
42. Circumstantial evidence are those facts, which
the court may infer further. There is a stark contrast
between direct evidence and circumstantial
evidence. In cases of circumstantial evidence, the
courts are called upon to make inferences from the
available evidence, which may lead to the accused’s
guilt. In majority of cases, the inference of guilt is
usually drawn by establishing the case from its
initiation to the point of commission wherein each
factual link is ultimately based on evidence of a fact
36or an inference thereof. Therefore, the courts have to
identify the facts in the first place so as to fit the case
within the parameters of “chain link theory” and then
see whether the case is made out beyond
reasonable doubt. In India we have for a long time
followed the “chain link theory” since Hanumant
case, which of course needs to be followed herein
also.”
86 The Supreme Court in the matter of Sailendra Rajdev Pasvan
and Others vs. State of Gujarat Etc., AIR 2020 SC 180
observed that in a case of circumstantial evidence, law postulates
two-fold requirements. Firstly, that every link in the chain of
circumstances necessary to establish the guilt of the accused
must be established by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt
and secondly, all the circumstances must be consistent pointing
out only towards the guilt of the accused. We need not burden this
judgment by referring to other judgments as the above principles
have been consistently followed and approved by this Court time
and again.
87 Upon a meticulous and comprehensive evaluation of the entire
oral and documentary evidence on record, including the
testimonies of prosecution witnesses, exhibited documents,
material objects/articles, and the scientific reports, this Court
records that at the outset, it stands firmly established that the
present case is one resting entirely upon circumstantial evidence,
there being no direct eyewitness to the occurrence. In such cases,
37
the law as laid down in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda (supra)
mandates that the chain of circumstances must be so complete as
to exclude every hypothesis except the guilt of the accused.
Applying the said principles, this Court proceeds to examine
whether the prosecution has succeeded in establishing an
unbroken chain of incriminating circumstances.
88 From the evidence of Roop Singh (PW-1), Radhabai (PW-2),
Saurabh Agarwal (PW-5), Aditya Pratap Singh (PW-15) and
Derharam Tandon (PW-19), duly corroborated by CCTV footage
(Ex.P-4, Ex.P-5, Ex.P-40) and material Articles, it stands
conclusively proved that:
* The deceased was last seen alive in the company of the
accused at about 2:12 a.m. on 05.04.2022,* The accused was seen dragging the deceased by her hair and
taking her out of the CCTV camera range.
89 The authenticity and integrity of the CCTV footage has been
scientifically corroborated by the Cyber Forensic Lab report (Ex.P-
40) and certificate under Section 65-B (Ex.P-41), thereby ruling
out any possibility of tampering.
90 Further, the memorandum statement of the accused (Ex.P-3),
proved through PW-19 and corroborated by independent
witnesses PW-1 and PW-4, led to the recovery of:
* Blood-stained iron rod
38* Blood-stained shirt and jeans under seizure memo Ex.P-2.
91 The recoveries made pursuant to the disclosure statement of the
accused constitute a highly incriminating circumstance admissible
under Section 27 of the Evidence Act and lend strong
corroboration to the prosecution case.
92 Now coming to the medical and forensic evidence, the medical
evidence of Dr. K.K. Sidar (PW-10), supported by postmortem
findings and FSL report (Ex.P-38), establishes that:
* The deceased sustained severe head injuries leading to
brain hemorrhage,* There was rupture of uterus and grievous injury to genitalia,
* The injuries were consistent with insertion of a rod-like
object,* Human blood was found on the seized rod and clothes of the
accused.
93 The medical opinion clearly supports the prosecution case that
the injuries were homicidal in nature and sufficient to cause death.
94 The contention of the defence regarding absence of sperm is
devoid of merit. Reliance is placed upon the judgment of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Lillu @ Rajesh & Anr. v. State of
Haryana, reported in (2013) 14 SCC, wherein it has been held
that absence of injuries or spermatozoa does not disprove rape
and that outdated medical tests and past sexual history are
irrelevant for determining consent. Relevant paras of the judgment
are reproduced hereinbelow:
39
“11. In Narender Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi), AIR
2012 SC 2281, this Court dealt with a case where the
allegation was that the victim of rape herself was an
unchaste woman, and a woman of easy virtue. The
court held that so far as the prosecutrix is concerned,
mere statement of prosecutrix herself is enough to
record a conviction, when her evidence is read in its
totality and found to be worth reliance. The incident in
itself causes a great distress and humiliation to the
victim though, undoubtedly a false allegation of rape can
cause equal distress, humiliation and damage to the
accused as well. The Court further held as under:
“26. Even in cases where there is some material to show
that the victim was habituated to sexual intercourse, no
inference of the victim being a woman of “easy virtues”
or a women of “loose moral character” can be drawn.
Such a woman has a right to protect her dignity and
cannot be subjected to rape only for that reason. She
has a right to refuse to submit herself to sexual
intercourse to anyone and everyone because she is not
a vulnerable object or prey for being sexually assaulted
by anyone and everyone. Merely because a woman is of
easy virtue, her evidence cannot be discarded on that
ground alone rather it is to be cautiously appreciated.
(Vide: State of Maharashtra & Anr. v. Madhukar Narayan
Mardikar, AIR 1991 SC 207; State of Punjab v. Gurmit
Singh & Ors., AIR 1996 SC 1393; and State of U.P. v.
Pappu @ Yunus & Anr., AIR 2005 SC 1248).
27. In view of the provisions of Sections 53 and 54 of the
Evidence Act, 1872, unless the character of the
prosecutrix itself is in issue, her character is not a
relevant factor to be taken into consideration at all”.
40
12. In State of Punjab v. Ramdev Singh, AIR 2004 SC
1290, this court dealt with the issue and held that rape is
violative of victim’s fundamental right under Article 21 of
the Constitution. So, the courts should deal with such
cases sternly and severely. Sexual violence, apart from
being a dehumanizing act, is an unlawful intrusion on
the right of privacy and sanctity of a woman. It is a
serious blow to her supreme honour and offends her
self-esteem and dignity as well. It degrades and
humiliates the victim and where the victim is a helpless
innocent child or a minor, it leaves behind a traumatic
experience. A rapist not only causes physical injuries,
but leaves behind a scar on the most cherished position
of a woman, i.e. her dignity, honour, reputation and
chastity. Rape is not only an offence against the person
of a woman, rather a crime against the entire society. It
is a crime against basic human rights and also violates
the most cherished fundamental right guaranteed under
Article 21 of the Constitution.
13. In view of International Covenant on Economic,
Social, and Cultural Rights 1966; United Nations
Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of
Crime and Abuse of Power 1985, rape survivors are
entitled to legal recourse that does not retraumatize
them or violate their physical or mental integrity and
dignity. They are also entitled to medical procedures
conducted in a manner that respects their right to
consent. Medical procedures should not be carried out
in a manner that constitutes cruel, inhuman, or
degrading treatment and health should be of paramount
consideration while dealing with gender-based violence.
The State is under an obligation to make such services
available to survivors of sexual violence. Proper
41
measures should be taken to ensure their safety and
there should be no arbitrary or unlawful interference with
his privacy.
14. Thus, in view of the above, undoubtedly, the two
finger test and its interpretation violates the right of rape
survivors to privacy, physical and mental integrity and
dignity. Thus, this test, even if the report is affirmative,
cannot ipso facto, be given rise to presumption of
consent.”
95 Further, Section 375 IPC clearly provides that insertion of any
object into the vagina to any extent constitutes rape. In the
present case:
* The medical evidence proves insertion of a rod,
* The injuries to genitalia corroborate violent penetration,
* The conduct of the accused and surrounding circumstances
establish absence of consent.
96 Additionally, the deceased being a mentally unsound and
vulnerable woman, the question of valid consent does not arise.
97 The conduct of the accused, as reflected from CCTV footage, his
memorandum statement, recovery of incriminating articles, and
failure to explain circumstances under Section 106 of the
Evidence Act, clearly indicates that the accused acted with the
intention of satisfying his sexual lust and, upon resistance by the
victim, caused brutal injuries resulting in her death.
98 The prosecution has successfully established the following chain:
1. Deceased was last seen with the accused (CCTV
evidence),
42
2. Shortly thereafter found grievously injured and later died,
3. Recovery of weapon and blood-stained clothes at
instance of accused,
4. Medical evidence corroborating assault and rape,
5. Forensic evidence linking accused with crime,
6. Failure of accused to offer any plausible explanation.
99 The above circumstances form a complete and unbroken chain,
pointing unerringly towards the guilt of the accused and ruling out
any hypothesis of innocence.
100 The present case reveals extreme brutality wherein a mentally
unstable and helpless woman was targeted, she was dragged,
sexually assaulted in a barbaric manner, a rod was inserted into
her private parts, her head was smashed against a stone, leading
to death. Such conduct reflects depravity of the highest order. The
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mukesh & Anr. v. State (NCT of
Delhi) (supra) has held that crimes of this nature shock the
collective conscience of society and warrant strict judicial
response.
101 Reliance is placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in Dhananjoy Chatterjee v. State of West Bengal (1994)
2 SCC, wherein it has been held that in cases of heinous offences
like rape followed by murder, the Courts must respond to the
collective conscience of society and impose punishment
proportionate to the gravity of the offence. Relevant paras of the
judgment are reproduced hereinbelow:
43
“14. In recent years, the rising crime rate against
women has made the criminal sentencing by the
courts a subject of concern. Today there are admitted
disparities. Some criminals get very harsh sentences
while many receive grossly different sentence for an
essentially equivalent crime and a shockingly large
number even go unpunished thereby encouraging the
criminal and in the ultimate making justice suffer by
weakening the system’s credibility. Of course, it is not
possible to lay down any cut and dry formula relating
to imposition of sentence but the object of sentencing
should be to see that the crime does not go
unpunished and the victim of crime as also the society
has the satisfaction that justice has been done to it. In
imposing sentences in the absence of specific
legislation, Judges must consider variety of factors
and after considering all those factors and taking an
overall view of the situation, impose sentence which
they consider to be an appropriate one. Aggravating
factors cannot be ignored and similarly mitigating
circumstances have also to be taken into
consideration.
15. In our opinion, the measure of punishment in a
given case must depend upon the atrocity of the
crime; the conduct of the criminal and the defenceless
and unprotected state of the victim. Imposition of
appropriate punishment is the manner in which the
courts respond to the society’s cry for justice against
the criminals. Justice demands that courts should
impose punishment befitting the crime so that the
courts reflect public abhorrence of the crime. The
courts must not only keep in view the rights of the
criminal but also the rights of the victim of crime and
44the society at large while considering imposition of
appropriate punishment.
16. The sordid episode of the security guard, whose
sacred duty was to ensure the protection and welfare
of the inhabitants of the flats in the apartment, should
have subjected the deceased, a resident of one of the
flats, to gratify his lust and murder her in retaliation for
his transfer on her complaint, makes the crime even
more heinous. Keeping in view the medical evidence
and the state in which the body of the deceased was
found, it is obvious that a most heinous type of
barbaric rape and murder was committed on a
helpless and defenceless school-going girl of 18
years. If the security guards behave in this manner
who will guard the guards? The faith of the society by
such a barbaric act of the guard, gets totally shaken
and its cry for justice becomes loud and clear. The
offence was not only inhuman and barbaric but it was
a totally ruthless crime of rape followed by cold
blooded murder and an affront to the human dignity of
the society. The savage nature of the crime has
shocked our judicial conscience. There are no
extenuating or mitigating circumstances whatsoever in
the case. We agree that a real and abiding concern for
the dignity of human life is required to be kept in mind
by the courts while considering the confirmation of the
sentence of death but a cold blooded preplanned
brutal murder, without any provocation, after
committing rape on an innocent and defenceless
young girl of 18 years, by the security guard certainly
makes this case a “rarest of the rare” cases which
calls for no punishment other than the capital
punishment and we accordingly confirm the sentence
45of death imposed upon the appellant for the offence
under Section 302 IPC. The order of sentence
imposed on the appellant by the courts below for
offences under Sections 376 and 380 IPC are also
confirmed along with the directions relating thereto as
in the event of the execution of the appellant, those
sentences would only remain of academic interest.
This appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.”
102 In view of the foregoing discussion, this Court is of the considered
opinion that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt
that the accused committed rape upon the deceased by inserting
a rod into her private parts without her consent, the accused
caused grievous injuries endangering her life and the accused
intentionally caused the death of the deceased.
103 This Court is conscious of the fact that the present case is not
merely an instance of a criminal act resulting in the death of a
woman, but a grave assault on the fundamental values of human
dignity, bodily integrity and the rule of law. The deceased, a
mentally unsound and destitute woman, was entitled to the same
constitutional protection of life and dignity as any other citizen.
The barbaric acts committed upon her person, as proved on
record, reflect a complete disregard for these foundational
principles. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mukesh & Anr. v. State
(NCT of Delhi) has emphasized that crimes of sexual violence are
not merely offences against an individual but are offences against
society at large, as they erode the moral fabric and collective
conscience of the community.
46
104 The evidence on record unmistakably establishes that the
deceased was a woman suffering from mental instability, living in
conditions of extreme vulnerability. Such individuals require
protection, care and societal support. Instead, the accused
exploited her helpless condition for the gratification of his sexual
lust and subjected her to inhuman violence. The law does not
countenance such acts and, rather, treats them as aggravated
forms of offence, warranting stern judicial response. The absence
of resistance or inability to offer meaningful consent in such
circumstances further aggravates the culpability of the accused.
105 The manner in which the offence has been committed i.e.,
dragging a helpless woman in the dead of night, subjecting her to
brutal sexual assault by insertion of a rod, and thereafter inflicting
fatal injuries shocks the conscience of this Court. Such acts not
only destroy the life of the victim but also instill fear and insecurity
in society, particularly among vulnerable sections. As held by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Dhananjoy Chatterjee (Supra), the
Courts are duty-bound to respond to such crimes in a manner that
reflects the collective conscience of society and ensures that
justice is not diluted by misplaced sympathy.
106 The criminal justice system must send a clear and unequivocal
message that crimes of such heinous nature shall be met with
stern consequences. The punishment imposed must not only be
proportionate to the gravity of the offence but must also serve as
a deterrent to potential offenders. Any leniency in such cases
47
would amount to a failure of justice and would undermine public
confidence in the judicial system.
107 Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the prosecution
has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and the trial Court
has rightly convicted the accused/appellant for the offence
punishable under Sections 376(1), 376(2)(l)(m), 376(A) and 302
of the IPC. Thus, we do not find any illegality or irregularity in the
findings recorded by the trial Court.
108 For the foregoing reasons, the criminal appeal being devoid of
merit and is liable to be and is hereby dismissed.
109 It is stated in the appeal that the appellant is in jail, he shall serve
out the sentence as ordered by the learned trial Court.
110 Registry is directed to send a copy of this judgment to the
concerned Superintendent of Jail where the Appellant is
undergoing the jail term, to serve the same on the Appellant
informing him that he is at liberty to assail the present judgment
passed by this Court by preferring an appeal before the Hon’ble
Supreme Court with the assistance of High Court Legal Services
Committee or the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee
111 Let a copy of this judgment and the original record be transmitted
to the trial court concerned forthwith for necessary information
and compliance.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha)
Judge Chief Justice
Manpreet