IMPORTANT POINT
The central legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of proving the case beyond reasonable doubt, following proper procedures for recording confessions, and adhering to statutory provisions for hearing the accused on the quantum of sentences.

JUDGMENT :

BUDI HABUNG, J.

1. Heard Mr. Sentiyanger, learned Legal Aid counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. K. Angami, learned PP for the State of Nagaland.

2. This is a jail appeal preferred under section 374 of the Criminal Procedure Code assailing the impugned judgment and order dated 01.10.2004 passed by the learned Additional Deputy Commissioner (Judicial), Phek, Nagaland in GR No. 27/2003 arising out of Phek PS Case No. 0012/2003 under section 302 & 376 IPC. By the said impugned judgment and order, the accused Shri. Kedukhoyi, has been convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for offence under section 302 & 376 of IPC.

3. The brief facts of the case leading to the preferring of this Jail appeal is that on 18.05.2003, a written request for registration of the case was received by the Officer-in-Charge, PS, Phek from one Nuvotso of Kotisu village, inter-alia stating therein that on 17.05.2003, his wife Smti. Vesazolu (Deceased) went to the field and did not return. On search, her dead body was found 1 km away from the village on 18.05.2003 morning at around 6 am. On finding her dead body it was found that she had been raped and murdered because her dead body was found naked and blood was oozing from her private part and thus, requested for taking necessary action. The case was registered being Phek PS case no. 0012/2003 U/S 302 & 376 IPC and investigated into.

4. On completion of the investigation, the IO of the case filed charge sheet against the accused under sections 302 & 376 of IPC.

5. At the outset it is pertinent to note that the record of the Trial Court were called for; however, it was reported that despite vigorous search made in the Court and office, the records in connection with above GR case no. 27/2003 corresponding to Phek PS case no 0012/2003 could not be traced out. Finding no alternative, the Trial Court was directed to make an effort to reconstruct the records of the said case. As a result, the Trial Court found out and collected some documents. The collected document includes the copy of FIR, the confessional statement of the accused (convict Shri. Kedukhoyi) and the impugned judgment and order collected from the District Jail, Phek. The said collected documents have been complied in the paper book.

6. The records reveal that the contents of the charges were read over and explained to the accused during consideration of charge, to which the accused pleaded guilty. However, the case had proceeded for trail. To establish their case, the prosecution had altogether examined 5 prosecution witnesses. Upon completion of the evidence of prosecution witness, the accused was examined under section 313 Cr.P.C. where the accused is stated to have admitted his guilt of commission of the alleged offence of murder and rape upon the deceased. The accused did not produce any witness in his defence.

7. On completion of the trial, the accused (appellant herein) has been convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for offence under section 302 & 376 IPC. The convict did not prefer appeal against the Judgment and sentence. However, later on the convict has made a representation before the Government praying for pre-mature release. But as the said application was not considered, the appellant filed W.P. (Crl)/02(K)/2019 before this Court which was disposed on 04.07.2019 with a direction to the respondent authority to consider the representation submitted by appellant. The said application was accordingly considered and rejected on the ground that a person convicted under section 376 IPC for committing rape is not entitled to be released pre-maturely.

8. Being highly aggrieved, the appellant has preferred this jail appeal through the Superintendent of Police with the assistance of the of Legal Aid Counsel amongst others, on the following grounds:

(i) That under the Indian Penal Code, it is legally impossible to rape a woman who has already died, therefore, the conviction is bad in law, so far as convi