The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on DNA profiling, circumstantial evidence, and the last-seen theory to establish the guilt of the accused in criminal cases.

JUDGMENT RAJEEV KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA, J. : – This is an appeal under section 374(2) of Criminal Procedure Code against the judgment dated 3-11-2010 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Datia (MP) in Sessions Trial No. 33 of 2007 whereby the appellant has been convicted under section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs. 10,000/-, under section 376 of Indian Penal Code sentenced to undergo Ten Years’ Rigorous Imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and under section 201 of Indian Penal Code, sentenced to undergo seven years’ Rigorous Imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5,000/- with default stipulations.

2. In brief, the prosecution case is that on 19-7-2006, at about 11:00 in the night at Police Station Chirula, District Datia, a merg intimation (Ex.P28) was recorded mentioning therein that on 19-7-2006 at about 08:00 in the night the prosecutrix (x) daughter of the appellant accused had gone for attending the call of nature and after half an hour, the appellant accused saw that his daughter (x) is lying dead and thereafter, he informed about the incident to the locality and on the basis of said merg intimation, police conducted an enquiry. PW12 Janved Singh Rathor reduced in writing the aforesaid merg intimation report (Ex.P28) on the basis of which Safina Form (Ex.P11) for preparation of memo of corpse of deceased was issued. Memo of corpse (Ex.P12) was prepared by M.S. Saxena, Crime Details (Spot Map) Ex.P.29 was prepared, postmortem of the deceased was conducted at District Hospital Datia on 20-7-2006 at about 11:00 am by Dr. G. L. Verma (PW8) vide Ex.P16, seizure memo of the seized articles was prepared vide Ex.P13, the accused-appellant was arrested on 29-11-2006 by Sunil Sharma (PW9) vide arrest memo Ex.P1. Shri Saxena, who had conducted inquest of the deceased-prosecutrix (X) died during investigation in respect of whom, the statement of Janved Singh Rathor (PW12) was also recorded. In furtherance of investigation, after recording of statements of witnesses and other formalities, police filed a charge-sheet under section 302 of Indian Penal Code before the Court.

3. It is needless to emphasize that the statement of appellant-accused was recorded under section 313 of Criminal Procedure Code. The appellant-accused abjured his guilt and in his defence, he did not choose to examine any witness. In order to prove charges, Prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses. The trial Court, after evaluating the evidence on record, has convicted and sentenced the appellant accused for the aforesaid offences, as indicated in Para 1 of this judgment.

4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that on going through the evidence led by the prosecution, it cannot be said that any offence is proved against the appellant. There is no eye-witness to the incident and the case is based upon the circumstantial evidence; and case is lacking complete chain of circumstances and there is no direct evidence of connectivity of appellant-accused in the alleged crime and the chain of circumstances is also not complete. If the evidence is scanned in its entirety, one can say that no offence is proved against the appellant. The trial Court has committed an error in passing the impugned judgment without analyzing evidence properly. Hence, it is prayed that the impugned judgment deserves to be set aside.

5. Refuting the aforesaid contentions raised by learned counsel for the appellant, learned State Counsel submitted that considering the nature and gravity of offence as well as the material available on record, the trial Court has rightly assigned cogent reasons in order to hold the appellant guilty and, therefore, no interference is required and the appeal deserves to be dismissed.

6. Following questions are necessary for determination of present appeal: –

(1) Whether on or before 19-7-2006, accused-appellant Komal Tiwari has committed rape with murder of his own daughter, aged around 14 years? (