SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(SC) 422

2011 (3) Supreme 283
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Markandey Katju and Gyan Sudha Misra, JJ.
Bhanu Valve — Petitioner(s)
versus
State — Respondent(s)
Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 3192 of 2011
(Crl MP.No(s). 7901/2011)
Decided on : 18-4-2011

IMPORTANT POINT
Father rightly convicted for raping and sexually exploiting his own daughter.

Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 376 – Father sexually exploiting his own daughter for five years and having a child from her – Trial court and High Court concurrently holding him guilty – No reason to disagree – No reasons to disbelieve the daughter’s testimony. (Para 5)

       Facts of the case:

        1. The petitioner has been found guilty of raping his own daughter regularly for five years after his wife left him, and has produced a child from her.

        2. Conviction by Trial Court was upheld by High Court.

       Finding of the Court:

        There is no reason to hold contrary to the concurrent finding of guilt by the courts below.

       Result : SLP dismissed.

       

ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. Delay condoned.

3. This petition has been filed against the impugned judgment of the Bomaby High Court dated 27.07.2010 by which the High Court has upheld the conviction of the petitioner by the trial court.

4. The facts in detail have been set out in the impugned judgment, and hence we are not repeating the same here. The High Court and the trial court have discussed the evidence in great detail, and we entirely agree with the view they have taken.

5. This is one of the most barbaric and heinous cases we have come across in our judicial career. The petitioner has been found guilty of raping his own daughter regularly for five years after his wife left him, and has produced a child from her. This kind of unheard behaviour cannot be condoned by any means. The daughter-PW-1 (prosecutrix) has given her evidence in this case, and we see no reason to disbelieve her.

6. The special leave petition is dismissed accordingly.

***********

2011 (3) Supreme 284

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

P. Sathasivam and Dr. B.S. Chauhan, JJ.

Kulvinder Singh & Anr. — Appellants

versus

State of Haryana — Respondent

Criminal Appeal No. 916 of 2005

Decided on : 11-4-2011

Indian Penal Code, 1860- Section 302 - Prosecution of appellant accused persons two in number for causing death of deceased by assaulting him with sharp edged weapon-Conviction by Trial Court-Appeal- Dismissed by High Court-Appeal-Evidence on record that A1 had been harbouring in his mind the suspicion that deceased was teasing his sister and wife-Deposition of PW10 that accused had disclosed to him that they had committed the murder of deceased- Nothing on record to indicate that he had any motive to falsely implicate the accused or that there was any motive for attributing an untruthful statement to accused-No reason not to accept his deposition in respect of extra-judicial confession made by the appellants as his deposition stood the test of credibility- Instantly motive stood proved distinctly, recovery of a blood stained barchha from sugarcane field at the disclosure of A1 was a circumstance which could safely be relied upon for conviction of appellants-accused- As both the appellants had been seen immediately before the occurrence at the place of occurrence and the deceased had come there shortly thereafter, they had an opportunity to kill deceased- After the occurrence, they were seen running together from the place of occurrence by PW.3- Such a conduct, if examined, with extra-judicial confession made by appellants before PW.10 completed the chain of circumstances pointing to the guilt of appellants-accused-Appeal dismissed. (Paras 6 to 15, 22)

Facts of the Case :

Appellant accused persons two in number were prosecuted herein in the instant case for causing death of deceased by assaulting him with sharp edged weopan. Trial Court convicted accused persons for said offence .Appeal thereagainst was Dismissed by High Court.

2. Present appeal has been filed against said order of High Court.

Findings of the Court :

Evidence on record that A1 had been harbouring in his mind the suspicion that deceased was teasing his sister and wife. Deposition of PW10 that accused had disclosed to him that they had committed the murder of deceased. There was Nothing on record to indicate that he had any motive to falsely implicate the accused or that there was any motive for attributing an untruthful statement to accused. No reason not to accept his deposition in respect of extra-judicial confession made by the appellants as his deposition stood the test of credibility. Instantly motive stood proved distinctly, recovery of a blood stained barchha from sugarcane field at the disclosure of A1 was a circumstance which could safely be relied upon for conviction of appellants-accused. As both the appellants had been seen immediately before the occurrence at the place of occurrence and the deceased had come there shortly thereafter, they had an opportunity to kill deceas






































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top