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

2018 Supreme(Jhk) 669

APARESH KUMAR SINGH, RATNAKER BHENGRA
Jitan Charan Das – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Kumar Nilesh
For the Opposite Parties : Sanjay Kumar, A.P.P and Shekhar Prasad Sinha

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - The court discusses whether prosecution evidence suffices to prove guilt for rape and murder beyond circumstantial evidence. (!) - The judgment grants leave to appeal, indicating the case deserves consideration by the appellate court based on trial material evidence. (!) , (!) - The trial court held the prosecution failed to establish a complete chain of circumstances; appellate review centers on whether the evidence could connect the accused to the crime. (!) , (!) , (!) - Post-mortem and forensic findings (evidence of sexual assault prior to death) are part of the factual basis considered in assessing proof of crime. (!) , (!) - The appellate court refrains from expressing opinion on merits and grants leave to appeal to reexamine entire trial material. (!) - The case involves Sections 376(D), 302 IPC and Section 4 POCSO; issue includes whether circumstantial evidence sufficiently ties the accused to rape and murder. (!) , (!)

How to determine if prosecution evidence establishes culpability for rape and murder beyond circumstantial evidence?

What is the standard for granting leave to appeal when a trial court acquits a defendant in a case involving alleged rape of a minor?

What are the grounds for appellate intervention when the trial court finds insufficient circumstantial evidence linking the accused to the crime?


ORDER :

1. By the Court.-Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Petitioner is the informant and grandfather of the victim girl, who has sought leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 13th January, 2016 passed, in SpI. (P) Case No. 16/14 by learned Court of Additional Sessions Judge-l-cum-SpI. Judge, Dhanbad, where under the sole accused/opposite' party No. 2 was acquitted of the charges under Sections 376(D) and 302 of Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of POCSO Act.

3. Informant, in his written report, alleged that his daughter and son-in-law died 12 years back and thereafter their two sons and one daughter (victim/deceased) were taken care of by him. Elder maternal grandson is aged about 25 years. second one is 20 years and victim maternal granddaughter. Pinki Kumari was 16 years of age as on 6th February. 2013. When she was studying in 10th standard at' Rajkiya Kanya Ucha Vidyalaya at about 5 pm. she went outside the house by carrying clothes in one. bucket and soap for cleaning the same and also to attend the call of nature. When she did not return by 6.30 pm. all the family members started making search for her. but could not trace her. On the next day at about 1.







































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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top