IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SUDHIR AGARWAL, OM PRAKASH-VII, JJ.
Gyan Chandra - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Jail Appeal No. 2210 of 2014
Decided On : 19-09-2018
FIR Delay - Criminal Law - Sections 376, 302, 201 IPC - Summary
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the rape and murder of a 4-1/2-year-old girl. The victim went missing and her dead body was found the next day. The accused was convicted based on circumstantial evidence including last seen evidence and medical examination.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the prosecution's evidence, including last seen evidence and medical examination, to be cogent and firmly established, leading to the conclusion that the accused was guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
Issues: The delay in lodging the FIR and the reliability of the last seen evidence were key issues in the case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the delay in lodging the FIR was not sufficient to disbelieve the prosecution's case. The last seen evidence and medical examination were found to be consistent and conclusive, leading to the conclusion of guilt.
Final Decision: The court affirmed the conviction and sentence imposed on the accused.
JUDGMENT :
OM PRAKASH-VII, J.
1. Present jail appeal has been preferred by accused-appellant Gyan Chandra against judgment and order dated 23.5.2001 passed by XIth Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut in Session Trial No. 237 of 1999 arising out of Case Crime No. 666 of 1998 (State of U.P. Vs. Gyan Chandra) under Sections 376, 302, 201 I.P.C., Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat convicting and sentencing the accused appellant under Section 376 IPC for life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 10,000/-and in the event of non payment of fine he has to further undergo two years’ imprisonment; under Section 302 IPC for life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 10,000/-and in the event of non payment of fine further to undergo two years’ imprisonment and for the offence under Section 201 IPC for seven years’ rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 5,000/-and in the event of non payment of fine, accused appellant has to undergo one year’s additional imprisonment. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
2. Prosecution story in nutshell, as unfolded in written report Ext. Ka-1, is as follows:
3. On 23.11.1998 informant Subhash Chand son of Lal Singh resident of Village Bijraul, police station Baraut, district Baghpat moved written report (Ext. Ka.-1) scribed by Sukhbir Singh mentioning therein that his daughter (victim) aged about 4-1/2 years was missing on 22.11.1998 since 2 P.M. In the evening they searched in the locality but her whereabouts could not be known. On 23.11.1998, in the morning dead body of the victim girl was found lying by the side of the wall in front of 'GHER' of Niranjan son of Imrit. It is also mentioned that Abhi Lal son of Randhir Singh Harijan, Tika Ram son of Nakli have also seen the accused appellant along with the daughter of the informant on 22.11.1998 at 2 P.M. taking her towards his home. Mahipal son of Amar Singh and Ishwar son of Kundan had seen the accused appellant throwing the dead body of the victim girl at 4 A.M. on 23.11.1998 in the morning at the place where dead body was recovered. Accused after committing the rape against the victim killed her by throttling her mouth and neck. Thus request was made to lodge the first information report (F.I.R.).
4. On the basis of written report (Ext. Ka-1) chik F.I.R. (Ext. Ka-3) at police station Baraut, on 23.11.1998 at 11.30 A.M. was registered at crime no. 666 of 1998, under Sections 302, 376, 511 IPC against the accused appellant. Entry was also made in the General Diary (in short G.D.) (Ext. Ka-). Investigation was entrusted to Rameshwar Singh Katheria, Station Officer concerned, Investigating Officer reached the place of occurrence and prepared site plan (Ext. Ka-5) of the place from where the dead body was recovered and also prepared another site plan (Ext. Ka-6) of the place where the incident is said to have taken place. Investigating Officer has also prepared the inquest report (Ext. Ka-7) on 23.11.1998 keeping the dead body in sealed cloth and also prepared the sample seal. Investigating Officer has also prepared the police papers relating to the inquest report at the same time as Ext.-8 to Ka.-11. Dead body was handed over to Constable Sagar Singh and Home Guard Arvind Singh along with relevant documents to carry the same to the mortuary.
5. Post mortem on the dead body of the deceased was conducted on 23.11.1998 at 4.45 P.M. itself. On general examination deceased was found to be 4-1/2 years old. Probable time of death was one day. She was average body built. Rigor mortis was present all over the body.
6. On examination of the body following ante mortem injuries were found :
II. Abrasion 2.5 cm x 0.8 cm on mid of forehead, 0.5 cm above upper end of nose.
III. Abrasion 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm on mid of chin.
IV. Abrasion 1 cm x 0.5 cm on rt side of neck, 3 cm below chin.
V. Abrasion (multiple) in an area 3 cm x 1 cm on front of neck, 3.5 cm above upper end of sternum. Smallest 0.3 cm x 0.3 cm,
Anil Kumar Singh v. State of Bihar
Brajendrasingh vs. State of M.P.
C. Chenga Reddy & Ors. vs. State of A.P.
Rajendra Pralhadrao Wasnik vs. State of Maharashtra
Sumer Singh vs. Surajbhan Singh and others
Hanumant Govind Nargundkar vs. State of M.P.
Majenderan Langeswaran Versus State (NCT of Delhi) and Another
Padala Veera Reddy vs. State of A.P.
Gambhir v. State of Maharashtra
Ramreddy Rajesh Khanna Reddy vs. State of A.P.
Reddy Sampath Kumar v. State of A.P.
Sattatiya vs. State of Maharashtra
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.