The duty of the court in evaluating circumstantial evidence and the law relating to circumstantial evidence.

S. MURALIDHAR, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment dated 29th March 2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (“ASJ”), SE-01 in SC No.36/2013 arising out of FIR No.225/2011 registered at PS Amar Colony convicting the Appellant for the offence punishable under Section 363/376/377/302 Indian Penal Code (“IPC”) and the consequential order on sentence dated 7th April 2014 whereby:

(i) For the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and payment of fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further simple imprisonment for 30 days;

(ii) For the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and payment of fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further simple imprisonment for 15 days;

(iii) For the offence punishable under Section 377 IPC, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and payment of fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days; and

(iv) For the offence punishable under Section 363 IPC, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and payment of fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days.

All sentences were directed to run concurrently.

Charge

2. The charge against the Appellant was that at around 9:00 pm on 10th June 2011, at J.J. Indra Camp, S.N. Puri, he kidnapped the deceased minor, the three year old child of Shintu @ Shekhar (PW-6), from the lawful guardianship of her parents. He was also charged with having raped the minor girl in the bushes near the railway line near the wall of New Friends Colony. He was further charged with having committed carnal intercourse against the order of nature with the minor girl. Lastly, he was charged with murdering the minor girl at the aforesaid place and time.

Version of the father of child

3. The father of the child (PW-6) has stated that at around 7:30 pm, his son, Vinay (PW-8), accompanied by his daughter, the deceased minor, went to the Mother Dairy booth at C-Market, S.N. Puri to buy milk. While PW-8 returned after 20 minutes, his daughter did not. Thereafter, PW-6 along with his wife, his brother Vijay (PW-1) and others searched for her but she could not be found even after an hour and a half. He thereafter lodged a complaint with the PP Sri Niwas Puri (Ex.PW-6/A) and continued searching for her.

4. According to PW-6, on the following morning, i.e. on 11th June 2011, at around 6 to 6.30 am, he was informed by someone that a child was found lying near the railway tracks. He then went there and found his daughter lying dead. She was naked with injury marks over her body. He then brought her back to his jhuggi and the police also reached there. Sub-Inspector (“SI”) K.P. Shah (PW-24) joined the investigation of the case along with Inspector Govind Sharma (PW-25), who was the Station House Officer (“SHO”) of PS Amar Colony. When they reached the house of PW-6, they found SI Subhash Chand (PW-20) already present there.

Investigation

5. Initially, PW-20 had registered FIR No.225/2011 at PS Amar Colony under Section 363 IPC on receipt of the complaint of PW-6 on 10th June 2011. At 7:00 am on the next morning, when PW-6 informed the police about the dead body of the child having been located, PW-20 reached there and then informed PW-25. Upon noticing several injury marks on the body of the deceased, the SHO altered the FIR to be one under Section 302 IPC and took up the investigation.

6. The crime team was called to the spot. It appears that the dead body of the child was first taken to the Department of Medicine and Emergency at AIIMS at around 9:00 am on 11th June 2011 where it was first examined by Dr. Rajesh Routray (PW-22). He, however, did not examine the body in detail but referred the body for post-mortem examination which was perfo