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

2020 Supreme(MP) 250

MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT BENCH AT INDORE
S.C. Sharma, Shailendra Shukla, JJ.
State Of M.P. : Honey @ Kakku - Appellant
Versus
Honey @ Kakku : State Of M.P. - Respondent
CRRFC. No. 12 of 2019 and CRA. No. 8818 of 2019
Decided On : 03-03-2020

Advocates Appeared:
Shri Shri R.S. Chhabra, Learned Addl. Advocate General with Shri L.S. Chandiramani, Learned Public Prosecutor, for the Appellant/State; Shri Avinash Sirpurkar, learned Senior Advocate with Shri B. Patel, Advocate, for the Respondent in Honey @ Kakku

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 363, 366, 376AB, 302, 201, 376A - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Section 5(n) read with Section 6 - Conviction for kidnapping, murder and sexual assault of a minor. The appellant was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment, along with imprisonment for other offences. The court emphasized the evidence of last seen, DNA matches, and corroborative testimonies supporting the prosecution's case. It was concluded that the prosecution successfully proved the elements of murder and aggravated sexual assault under relevant laws. (Paras 1-80)

Facts of the case:
The appellant was accused of kidnapping a 4-year-old girl, committing sexual assault, and murder. The child was reported missing after being taken from a coaching class, and her body was later discovered with multiple injuries, suggesting foul play. Evidence included witness testimony, physical evidence, and DNA analysis. (Paras 1-40)

Findings of Court:
The trial court's conviction was supported by overwhelming evidence against the appellant, including DNA matches and witness corroboration of the abduction and murder. The circumstances established a strong case of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. (Paras 51-79)

Issues: The court addressed whether there was sufficient evidence to convict the appellant for the crimes, particularly examining the last seen evidence and DNA findings to link him to the crime. (Paras 1-34)

Ratio Decidendi: The court established that a conviction can be supported by circumstantial evidence when it forms a complete chain leading to only one conclusion. The appellant's conduct and the forensic evidence were deemed conclusive. (Paras 41-74)

Result: The appeal against conviction was dismissed, and the death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment for one of the charges owing to the failure to prove it as a rare case. The sentences for other convictions were upheld. (Paras 79-80)

Table of Content
1. conviction details of appellant (Para 1 , 2)
2. appellant's plea and arguments against conviction (Para 3 , 4)
3. questions for consideration in appeal (Para 5 , 6)
4. evidence regarding age of deceased (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
5. appellant's involvement in the crime (Para 11 , 12)
6. identification of the deceased (Para 18 , 20)
7. recovery of incriminating evidence (Para 22 , 28 , 30)
8. dna evidence linking appellant to crime (Para 38 , 46 , 48)
9. application of legal precedents in sentencing (Para 50 , 52 , 54 , 56)
10. final sentencing considerations and judgement summary (Para 64 , 79 , 80 , 81)

JUDGMENT

Shailendra Shukla, J. - The present reference and appeal arise out of judgment dated 30.9.2019, pronounced in Special Case No. 2147/2018 by the 15th A.S.J. and Special Judge, Indore whereby, appellant Honey @ Kakku has been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 363 , 366, 376AB, 302, 201, 376A of IPC and under Section 5 (n) read with Section 6 of POCSO Act. The accused has not been sentenced separately under Section 5 (n) read with Section 6 of POCSO Act, in view of Section 42 of POCSO Act which provides for sentencing under the provisions of IPC, if such provision provides for stiffer sentence and therefore was sentenced under Section 376AB in place of Section 5 (n) read with Section (6) of POCSO Act. Ultimately, the appellant has been sentenced under various provisions as under :-

Provision of IPC

Sentence

Section 363 IPC

5 years RI with fine of Rs.2000/-. In default of payment of fine 2 months additional RI.

Section 366 of IPC

7 years RI with fine of Rs.3000/-. In default of payment of fine 2 months additional RI.

Section 376 AB of IPC

Life Imprisonment till natural death with fine of Rs.4000/-. In default of payment of fine 3 months additional RI.

Section 5 (n) read with Section 6 of POCSO Act.

Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.4000/-. In default of payment of fine 3 months additional RI.

Section 302 of IPC

Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.4000/-. In default of payment of fine 3 months additional RI.

201 of IPC

3 years RI with fine of Rs.2000/-. In default of payment of fine 2 months additional RI.

376A of IPC

Capital punishment with fine of Rs.5000/-. In default of payment of fine 4 months additional RI.

2. The prosecution story in short was that on 25.10.2018 Ashu (PW2) had left his daughter 'A' aged about 4 years to the coaching classes run by Anamika (PW7) at Sudama Nagar, Indore at about 5.00 PM and when he came back to fetch his daughter he was told by Anamika (PW7) that appellant Honey has already taken his daughter half hour back. Ashu (PW2) came back and he along with his wife Nitika (PW1) searched for their daughter but when they could not find her, a missing person report Ex.P/2 and FIR Ex.P/1 were lodged. The FIR was registered as Crime No.539/2018 under Section 363 of IPC. Next day, ie., 26.10.2018 witness Premnath (PW12) discovered body of a girl child at a spot where Premnath (PW12) had gone to relieve himself. Premnath (PW12) gave an intimation, in M.G. Road Police Station which is Ex.P/24. Police arrived at the spot and prepared spot map Ex.P/25. The body of the girl child was found in naked condition. Its hands and legs were visible but trunk was covered with stones. Merg was registered. On receiving such information, the scientific officer Dr. B.L. Mandloi (PW30) arrived at the spot along with photographer and prepared a report Ex.P/70 and photographs of the spot and the deceased were taken. The identification proceedings were initiated and the father Ashu (PW2) identified the body as that of his daughter. The identification memo was drawn and a panel of doctors performed postmortem in order to determine the cause of death. As per their report, the death was on account of culpable homicide and the gi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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 Back to top