2006 Supreme(Del) 1902

High Court Of Delhi
R. S. SODHI, P. K. BHASIN
STATE OF DELHI - Appellant
Versus
SANTOSH KUMAR SINGH - Respondents
CRIMINAL APPEAL 233 Of 2000
Decided On : 10/17/2006

Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 376 - Offences of rape and murder - Prosecution of Respondent for committing rape on deceased and thereafter causing her death by assaulting her with his helmet and strangulating her with wire of heat convector - Prosecution case that accused had been continuously harassing deceased from end of 1994 to January 1996, till a few days before her murder - Accused had more than once given an undertaking to police that he would not harass deceased in future while admitting that accused had been doing so earlier - Motive of accused was to have deceased or to break her - Accused was seen outside door of flat of deceased with helmet in his hand which had a visor at crucial time before murder by immediate neighbour of deceased - Accused reached late to attend his class at Indian Law Institute where he was a student on day of occurrence - DNA finger printing test conclusively established guilt of accused - Deceased had 19 injuries on her person beside three broken ribs which was suggestive of force used for rape - Acquittal by Trial Court on ground that there was likelihood of tampering with materials sent for DNA test and that procedure of DNA test was not fair and proper - Appeal against acquittal - No explanation offered by Respondent as to what he was doing in university on date of occurrence when he was not studying there - Respondent accused was found dead in her house by her personal security officer - Evidence of neighbour of deceased PW2 could not be brushed aside nor challenged on ground of it being recorded late - Version of PW2 not recorded unscrupulously by initial Investigating Officer who was favouring father of accused, a Senior Police Officer - No explanation offered by accused as to why he reached late for his class at Indian Law Institute on date of occurrence - Continuous stalking of deceased by accused inspite of police complaints suggested a strong motive to have deceased or that she did not enjoy her life - Motive for commission of crime proved beyond any shadow of doubt by prosecution - DNA test conclusively established guilt of respondent that he only committed rape on deceased and murdered her - No possibility of tempering with exhibits used for DNA test nor any tempering was done with - Evidence of doctor conducting DNA test that method used and test conducted in determining and arriving at conclusion was done as per standard practice - Circumstances formed a chain so complete which led only to one conclusion that Respondent alone committed rape on deceased and murdered her - Impugned judgment of Trial Court acquitting respondent accused being unsustainable set-aside.

       (Paras 30, 32, 33, 34, 45, 46, 48, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54).

       Facts of the case:

        1. The Respondent herein in the instant case was prosecuted for committing rape on deceased and thereafter causing her death by assaulting her with his helmet and strangulating her with wire of heat convector. As per prosecution case accused had been continuously harassing deceased from end of 1994 to January 1996, till a few days before her murder. Accused had more than once given an undertaking to police that he would not harass deceased in future while admitting that accused had been doing so earlier. Motive of accused was to have deceased or to break her. DNA finger printing test conclusively established guilt of accused. However Trial Court acquitted respondent on ground that there was likelihood of tampering with materials sent for DNA test and that procedure of DNA test was not fair and proper.

       2.Present Appeal has been preferred by State against said order of acquittal.

       3.Findings of the Court: The Court held that no explanation was offered by respondent as to what he was doing in university on date of occurrence when he was not studying there. Respondent accused was found dead in her house by her Personal Security Officer. Evidence of neighbour of deceased PW2 could not be brushed aside nor challenged on ground of it being recorded late as version of PW2 was not recorded unscrupulously by Initial Investigating Officer who was favouring father of accused, a Senior Police Officer. No explanation was offered by accused as to why he reached late for his class at Indian Law Institute on date of occurrence. Continuous stalking of deceased by accused inspite of police complaints suggested a strong motive to have deceased or that she did not enjoy her life. Motive for commission of crime was proved beyond any shadow of doubt by prosecution. DNA test conclusively established guilt of tespondent that he only committed rape on deceased and murdered her. There was no possibility of tempering with exhibits used for DNA test nor any tempering was done with. As per evidence of doctor conducting DNA test method used and test conducted in determining and arriving at conclusion was done as per standard practice. Circumstances formed a chain so complete which led only to one conclusion that respondent alone committed rape on deceased and murdered her. Impugned judgment of Trial Court acquitting respondent accused being unsustainable held liable to be set-aside.

       Result: Appeal allowed.

       Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 302, 376 — Offences of rape and murder — Prosecution of Respondent for committing rape on deceased and thereafter causing her death by assaulting her with his helmet and strangulating her with wire of heat convector — Prosecution case that accused had been continuously harassing deceased from end of 1994 to January 1996, till a few days before her murder — Accused had more than once given an undertaking to police that he would not harass deceased in future while admitting that accused had been doing so earlier — Motive of accused was to have deceased or to break her — Accused was seen outside door of flat of deceased with helmet in his hand which had a visor at crucial time before murder by immediate neighbour of deceased — Accused reached late to attend his class at Indian Law Institute where he was a student on day of occurrence — DNA finger printing test conclusively established guilt of accused — Deceased had 19 injuries on her person beside three broken ribs which was suggestive of force used for rape — Acquittal by Trial Court on ground that there was likelihood of tampering with materials sent for DNA test and that procedure of DNA test was not fair and proper — Appeal against acquittal — No explanation offered by Respondent as to what he was doing in university on date of occurrence when he was not studying there — Respondent accused was found dead in her house by her personal security officer — Evidence of neighbour of deceased PW2 could not be brushed aside nor challenged on ground of it being recorded late — Version of PW2 not recorded unscrupulously by initial Investigating Officer who was favouring father of accused, a Senior Police Officer — No explanation offered by accused as to why he reached late for his class at Indian Law Institute on date of occurrence — Continuous stalking of deceased by accused inspite of police complaints suggested a strong motive to have deceased or that she did not enjoy her life — Motive for commission of crime proved beyond any shadow of doubt by prosecution — DNA test conclusively established guilt of respondent that he only committed rape on deceased and murdered her — No possibility of tempering with exhibits used for DNA test nor any tempering was done with — Evidence of doctor conducting DNA test that method used and test conducted in determining and arriving at conclusion was done as per standard practice — Circumstances formed a chain so complete which led only to one conclusion that Respondent alone committed rape on deceased and murdered her — Impugned judgment of Trial Court acquitting respondent accused being unsustainable set aside.

       (Paras 30, 32, 33, 34, 45, 46, 48, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54).

       Facts of the case:

        1. The Respondent herein in the instant case was prosecuted for committing rape on deceased and thereafter causing her death by assaulting her with his helmet and strangulating her with wire of heat convector. As per prosecution case accused had been continuously harassing deceased from end of 1994 to January 1996, till a few days before her murder. Accused had more than once given an undertaking to police that he would not harass deceased in future while admitting that accused had been doing so earlier. Motive of accused was to have deceased or to break her. DNA finger printing test conclusively established guilt of accused. However Trial Court acquitted respondent on ground that there was likelihood of tampering with materials sent for DNA test and that procedure of DNA test was not fair and proper.

       2.Present Appeal has been preferred by State against said order of acquittal.

       3.Findings of the Court: The Court held that no explanation was offered by respondent as to what he was doing in university on date of occurrence when he was not studying there. Respondent accused was found dead in her house by her Personal Security Officer. Evidence of neighbour of deceased PW2 could not be brushed aside nor challenged on ground of it being recorded late as version of PW2 was not recorded unscrupulously by Initial Investigating Officer who was favouring father of accused, a Senior Police Officer. No explanation was offered by accused as to why he reached late for his class at Indian Law Institute on date of occurrence. Continuous stalking of deceased by accused inspite of police complaints suggested a strong motive to have deceased or that she did not enjoy her life. Motive for commission of crime was proved beyond any shadow of doubt by prosecution. DNA test conclusively established guilt of tespondent that he only committed rape on deceased and murdered her. There was no possibility of tempering with exhibits used for DNA test nor any tempering was done with. As per evidence of doctor conducting DNA test method used and test conducted in determining and arriving at conclusion was done as per standard practice. Circumstances formed a chain so complete which led only to one conclusion that respondent alone committed rape on deceased and murdered her. Impugned judgment of Trial Court acquitting respondent accused being unsustainable held liable to be set aside

       Result: Appeal allowed