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

2007 Supreme(MP) 969

MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)
S. SAMVATSAR AND SANJAY YADAV, JJ.
State of Madhya Pradesh
Versus
Raju alias Rajkumar.
C. R. R. E. (Death Reference) No. 2 of 2007 and Cri. Appeal No. 451 of 2007
decided on : 26-9-2007.

Advocates appeared:
C. S. Dixit, Public Prosecutor, for the State; Padam Singh, for Respondent-Accused. Ravindra Dixit, for Complainant.

The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for reliable evidence to connect the accused with the offense, and the court's reliance on the completeness and reliability of the chain of circumstances.

Headnote:

Death Reference - Criminal Law - Sections 376(2)(f) and 302 of I. P. C. - The judgment discusses the medical and scientific evidence, the proceeding of Sniffer Dog, and the arrest of the accused. The court analyzes the contradictions in the evidence and the doubts raised about the timing of the incident, the arrest, and the reliability of the Sniffer Dog evidence. The court concludes that the chain of circumstances is not complete and there is no reliable evidence connecting the accused with the offense, leading to the acquittal of the accused.

Fact of the Case:

The case involves the death of a school-going girl, with the accused being found guilty of the offense under Sections 376(2)(f) and 302 of I. P. C. The prosecution's case relies on circumstantial evidence, including medical and scientific evidence, and the proceeding of Sniffer Dog.

Finding of the Court:

The court finds that the medical evidence contradicts the prosecution's timeline of the incident, and the evidence related to the arrest of the accused and the Sniffer Dog proceeding raises doubts about the reliability of the evidence. The court concludes that there is no reliable evidence connecting the accused with the offense, leading to the acquittal of the accused.

Issues: The key issues include the timing of the incident, the reliability of the Sniffer Dog evidence, and the contradictions in the evidence related to the arrest of the accused.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision is based on the lack of reliable evidence connecting the accused with the offense, as the chain of circumstances is not complete and there are doubts about the timing of the incident and the reliability of the Sniffer Dog evidence.

Final Decision: The Death Reference is dismissed, and the Criminal Appeal filed by the accused is allowed, resulting in the acquittal of the accused.

Judgement

S. SAMVATSAR, J. :- This Death Reference is submitted by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Vidisha for confirmation of death sentence imposed by him in S. T. No. 191/2005, whereby the accused Raju alias Rajkumar is found guilty for commission of offence under Sections 376(2)(f) and 302 of I. P. C. and sentenced him death sentence. Criminal Appeal No. 451/2007 is filed by accused Raju alias Rajkumar challenging the death sentence and conviction. Hence, this judgment shall govern the disposal of Death Reference No. 2/2007 and Criminal Appeal No. 451/2007.

2. As per prosecution case, one Ku. Sitabai aged about 11 years was school going girl. She had gone to school on 12-9-2005 and after closing of her school, she used to return at about 4.00 p.m., but on that date she did not return to her home. Hence, her father Harprasad (PW5) went to the school for searching his daughter, where he was told that his daughter had already left the school for home. When Harprasad (PW-5) was returning, he found her dead body lying in the bushes on the way with her school bag, books and dress. He lodged a report of the said incident with Outpost Khamkhera, where report was recorded as Ex. P-13 and Ex. P. 12 is the 'Marg'. On the basis of this FIR and 'Marg', another FIR was lodged at main Police Station Satpada as Ex. P-20 and 'Marg' as Ex. P-21. The spot map was prepared as Ex. P-5. The police during investigation arrested the accused in pursuance of proceeding of Sniffer Dog and filed challan against him. The matter was committed to the Sessions Court and the Sessions Court after recording the evidence and apperciating the same held the accused guilty of the said offence and imposed death sentence.

3. Shri Padam Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused has submitted that the Sessions Court has committed grave error in holding that the accused is guilty of the offence. He submitted that there is no eye-witness to the said incident and the case totally depends upon the circumstantial evidence. He further submitted that the chain of circumstances in the present case is not complete, hence the accused cannot be convicted. He further submitted that the proceeding of Sniffer Dog/Tracking Dog itself is doubtful in light of evidence of Investigating Officer. He submitted that the evidence of Sniffer Dog is always a weak type of evidence, on the basis of which the accused cannot be convicted. He further submitted that the prosecution has changed the entire genesis of the crime. According to him, death has occurred much prior to the time put forth by the prosecution, and the medical evidence and the scientific report do not support the prosecution story. He further submitted that death sentence should be awarded only in rare of rarest cases. The present case is not covered in a rare of the rarest cases and, therefore, for this reason also the death sentence should not be confirmed by this Court.

4. To appreciate the evidence, the prosecution has examined as many as 17 witnesses, while two witnesses Dhoop Singh (CW-1) and Anar Singh Yadav (CW-2) are examined by the Court as Court witnesses. It is true that there is no eye-witness to the said incident and the prosecution story totally depends upon circumstantial evidence, which can be classified in two categories. First medical and scientific evidence and second the proceeding of Sniffer Dog and investigation made by the police.

5. First of all, we would like to deal with the medical evidence on record. The deceased had gone to school on 12-9-2005 and was found dead between 4-5 p.m. as per allegations made in the FIR (Ex. P-13). The post-mortem of the deceased was conducted by Dr. C. K. Chaurasiya (PW-9). As per his statement, the dead body of the deceased was brought before him on 13-9-2005 by the Police Station, Satpada. He had performed the post-mortem (Ex. P-18) at about 3.00 p.m. At the time of post-mortem, he found that flying insects were coming out of right nostril, there was

























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
whatsapp-icon Back to top