The court reinforced that in cases based entirely on circumstantial evidence, every link of guilt must be established beyond reasonable doubt, particularly in capital punishment cases.

JUDGMENT :

Mehta, J.

1. Heard.

2. Leave granted.

3. The present appeals by special leave are preferred on behalf of appellant No. 1-Akhtar Ali alias Ali Akhtar alias Shamim alias Raja Ustad¹[Hereinafter, being referred to as ‘accused-appellant No.1-Akhtar Ali’; appellant in Criminal Appeals @ SLP(Crl.) No(s). 14-15 of 2020.] and appellant No. 2-Prem Pal Verma²[Hereinafter, being referred to as ‘accused-appellant No.2-Prem Pal Verma’; appellant in Criminal Appeal @ SLP(Crl.) No(s). 6573 of 2020.], assailing the common judgment dated 18th October 2019, passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital³[Hereinafter, being referred to as ‘High Court’.] in Criminal Appeals⁴ Criminal Appeal No. 104 of 2016 along with Criminal Reference No.1. of 2016 and others.], partially upholding the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellants by the Special Judge (POCSO)/Fast Track Court/Additional District & Sessions Judge, Haldwani, District Nainital⁵[Hereinafter, being referred to as ‘the trial Court’.] vide judgment and order of sentence dated 11th March, 2016 in Session Trial Case⁶[Session Trial No. 09 of 2015.], whereby accused- appellant No.1-Akhtar Ali was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 376A, 363, and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860⁷[Hereinafter, being referred to as ‘the IPC.’]; under Section 3 read with Section 4, Section 5 read with Section 6 and Section 7 read with Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012⁸[Hereinafter, being referred to as ‘the POCSO Act.’]; and Section 66C of the Information Technology Act, 2000⁹[Hereinafter, being referred to as ‘IT Act’.]. Accused-appellant No. 2-Prem Pal Verma was convicted under Sections 212 of the IPC and Section 66C of the IT Act; however, he was acquitted of the charges under Sections 363, 201, 120-B, 376A of the IPC and Sections 16/17 read with Sections 4, 5, 6, 7 of the POCSO Act. The accused-appellants were sentenced as under:

4. Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution, giving rise to the present appeals, is as under:

4.1 On 21st November, 2014, at 11:30