In Reference: Received from Special Judge (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012), Burhanpur (M. P. ) vs Vijay @ Pintiya

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(MP) 281

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Sujoy Paul and Achal Kumar Paliwal, JJ.
In Reference: Received from Special Judge (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012), Burhanpur (M. P.) v. Vijay @ Pintiya
Criminal Reference Case No. 5 of 2019 with Criminal Appeal No.2680 of 2019 (Jabalpur): against the judgment dated 8.3.2019 passed by the Special Judge (POCSO Act), Burhanpur in Special Sessions Case No. 30/2018; Decided on 21.6.2023

Advocates appeared:
Ajay Gupta with Rajeev Mishra as amicus curiae; Laxmi Narayan Sakle for respondent; Ajay Shukla, Government Advocate for State.

Headnote:
(1) Criminal Trial -- circumstance of last seen together -- can be pressed into service if accused was last seen with victim -- no eye-witness deposed that they had seen appellant with victim at any point of time -- appellant resides in front of house of victim -- witnesses deposed that he was standing under neem tree at time of incident or was sitting in ‘otala’ of his house -- will not strengthen last seen theory. [Paras 48 to 52]
(2) Evidence Act, 1872 -- Ss. 27, 25 and 26 -- confession in memorandum u/s. 27 -- apart from clothes of appellant from his own house, no other incriminating material recovered at his instance -- dead body, clothes of victim etc. not recovered either at his instance or from him -- Court below committed error of law in treating entire memorandum statement as his confessional statement -- confession relating to commission of crime (if any) made in memorandum u/s. 27 cannot be used against accused is elementary principle. (2007) 12 SCC 230, (2007) 12 SCC 288 and (2023) 1 SCC 83 followed. AIR 2017 SC 1761 and AIR 2002 SC 3272 referred to. [Paras 55, 56 & 60]
(3) Penal Code, 1860 -- Ss. 376 (2) (m) and 376AB -- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 -- Ss. 5 and 6 -- no definite opinion by autopsy team regarding sexual assault -- no male DNA profile detected on slides taken from private part -- prosecution could not establish that victim was subjected to sexual assault -- finding relating to rape/sexual assault deserves to be jettisoned. [Paras 62 to 64]
(4) Practice (Criminal) -- DNA sampling -- DNA report relating to frock clearly against appellant -- however, prosecution failed to establish identity of frock therefore not possible to hold that it was victim’s frock which was subjected to DNA examination -- appellant not confronted with DNA report during examination u/s. 313 of CrPC thus it cannot be used against appellant. [Para 73]
(5) Criminal P.C. 1973 -- S. 313 -- purpose -- accused should be given opportunity to explain any of the circumstances appearing in evidence against him -- this section is in fact codification of principles of natural justice in statutory shape -- basic purpose is to provide fair trial to accused and to ensure that all incriminating materials are brought to his notice by Court so that he can put forth his explanation -- Court not only obliged to bring all incriminating material to notice of accused, it should do so in language understandable to a person of status of accused. (2004) 7 SCC 502, (2005) 6 SCC 101, (2008) 16 SCC 328, (2014) 10 SCC 270, (2019) 18 SCC 161 and (2020) 10 SCC 108 followed. [Paras 74 & 80]
(6) Criminal P.C. 1973 -- S. 313 -- duty of Court -- interaction between accused and Court u/s. 313 cannot be marginalised and permitted to be reduced to empty formality -- said process, preparation of relevant questions and even recording of answers cannot be permitted to be outsourced -- it is not a ministerial function -- this important function needs to be meticulously performed by presiding judge himself -- sufficient care and caution to be taken by Courts while interacting with accused -- Courts are to dispense justice, not to dispense with justice. Criminal Appeal No. 859 of 2010 referred to. [Para 82]
(7) Evidence Act, 1872 -- S. 54 -- previous conduct -- past conduct of appellant was not a fact in question -- appellant never tried to prove his previous good character -- in absence of any other clinching evidence, past conduct fades into insignificance -- more so, when appellant has no criminal record and prosecution witnesses were either hearsay witnesses or they never lodged any complaint against appellant. 2015 (4) Crimes 366 (SC), (1977) 3 SCC 268, (2007) 12 SCC 288 and 2019 (1) JLJ 51 (SC) : (2019) 12 SCC 460 followed. [Para 85]
(8) Extra-Judicial Confession -- cannot be discarded merely because it is extra-judicial confession -- confession of sterling quality and fulfils other parameters laid down in judgment of R. Metri -- can be sole ground to record conviction. (2022) 6 SCC 525 followed. (2012) 11 SCC 768, (2012) 6 SCC 403 and AIR 2015 SC 3686 referred to. [Para 88]
(9) Extra-Judicial Confession -- witness admittedly did not disclose factum of so-called extra-judicial confession of appellant to anybody -- stated in candid words during cross-examination that if police had not approached and asked him, he would not have disclosed this fact to anybody -- not safe to treat his statement as gospel truth and base entire conviction on it. AIR 1959 SC 18, (1973) 4 SCC 17, (1971) 3 SCC 778, S. (2010) 8 SCC 233 and AIR 1979 SC 1620 followed. [Para 92]
(10) Extra-Judicial Confession -- attains greater credibility and evidentiary value if supported by chain of cogent circumstances and is further corroborated by other prosecution witnesses -- when other circumstances do not strengthen case of prosecution, mere description of call details not sufficient to approve extra-judicial confession. (2022) 6 SCC 525 followed. [Paras 94 & 95]
(11) Penal Code, 1860 -- Ss. 363, 366, 376 (2) (m), 376AB, 302, 201 -- case based on circumstantial evidence -- prosecution required to establish entire chain of circumstances with accuracy and precision -- investigation conducted in extremely casual and cryptic manner -- nail samples of victim not collected at first instance -- collected after few days by digging out her body which was buried -- must have lost much of their evidentiary value -- no photographs of frock of victim which was a crucial evidence, placed on record -- description/identity of frock as per statements of different prosecution witnesses at variance -- could not be clinchingly established that frock of victim was sent for DNA test -- Court below failed to frame and put relevant questions relating to DNA report -- prosecution could not establish its case beyond reasonable doubt -- appellant acquitted by giving benefit of doubt. (1984) 4 SCC 116, (2002) 1 SCC 679 and (1980) 2 SCC 684 followed. (1994) 2 SCC 220, Criminal Reference No. 5 of 2015 decided on 3.3.2016, Criminal Reference No. 2 of 2016 and AIR 2013 SC 3817 referred to. [Paras 97, 99 to 101]
(12) Criminal Trial -- words ‘life’ and ‘file’ contain same letters -- every ‘file’ has relation with ‘life’ -- needs to be handled with utmost care, caution and sensitivity. [Para 102]
(13) Investigation -- technical flaw in investigation -- if flaw results into failure of justice, interference is inevitable -- no amount of work pressure or any other pressure on police can be reason to dilute requirement of law. [Para 103]
¼1½ nkafMd fopkj.k & vafre ckj lkFk ns[ks tkus dh ifjfLFkfr & bldk vkJ; rc gh fy;k tk ldrk gS] tc vfÒ;qDr vafre ckj ihfM+rk d¢ lkFk ns[kk x;k g¨ & fdlh çR;{kn'kÊ lk{kh us vfÒlk{; ugha fn;k fd mUg¨aus fdlh Òh le; vihykFkÊ d¨ ihfM+rk d¢ lkFk ns[kk & vihykFkÊ ihfM+rk d¢ Äj d¢ lkeus jgrk gS & lkf{k;¨a us vfÒlk{; fn;k fd ÄVuk d¢ le; og uhe d¢ o`{k d¢ uhps [kM+k Fkk ;k vius edku d¢ ^v¨Vys^ esa cSBk Fkk & vafre ckj lkFk ns[ks tkus dk fl)kar l'kDr ugha g¨xkA ¼iSjk 48 ls 52½
¼2½ lk{; vfèkfu;e] 1872 & èkkjk 27] 25 rFkk 26 & èkkjk 27 d¢ vèkhu Kkiu esa laLohÑfr & vihykFkÊ d¢ Lo;a d¢ Äj ls mld¢ vius oL=ksa d¢ vfrfjDr] vijkèk esa Qalkus okyh d¨Ã Òh lkexzh mld¢ crkus ij cjken ugha & ihfM+rk dk & 'ko] oL= bR;kfn mld¢ crkus ij ;k mlls cjken ugha & fupys U;k;ky; us laiw.kZ Kkiu dFku d¨ mldk laLohÑfr dFku eku dj fofèkd xyrh dh & ;g çkFkfed fl)kar gS fd èkkjk 27 d¢ vèkhu fn, x, Kkiu esa vijkèk djus ls lacafèkr laLohÑfr ¼;fn g¨½ dk mi;¨x vfÒ;qDr d¢ fo#) ugha fd;k tk ldrkA ¼2007½ 12 ,l lh lh 230] ¼2007½ 12 ,l lh lh 288 rFkk ¼2023½ 1 ,l lh lh 83 vuqlfjrA , vkb vkj 2017 ,l lh 1761 rFkk , vkb vkj 2002 ,l lh 3272 fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 55] 56 ,oa 60½
¼3½ naM lafgrk] 1860 & èkkjk 376¼2½¼M+½ rFkk 376 d] [k & ySafxd vijkèk¨a ls ckyd¨a dk laj{k.k vfèkfu;e] 2012 & èkkjk 5 rFkk 6 & 'ko&ijh{kk ny dh ySafxd geys d¢ lacaèk esa d¨Ã fuf'pr jk; ugha & xqIrkax ls yh xÃ LykbM¨a esa fdlh iq#"k dk Mh,u, ç¨Qkby ugha fudyk & vfÒ;¨tui{k fl) ugha dj ldk fd ihfM+rk ij ySafxd geyk gqvk & cykRlax@ySafxd geys ls lacafèkr fu"d"kZ vLohdkj fd, tkus ;¨X;A ¼iSjk 62 ls 64½
¼4½ çFkk ¼nkafMd½ & Mh,u, dk uewuk & ÝkWd ls lacafèkr Mh,u, çfrosnu Li"Vr% vihykFkÊ d¢ fo#) & rFkkfi] vfÒ;¨tui{k ÝkWd dh igpku LFkkfir djus esa vlQy jgk blfy, ;g vfÒfuèkkZfjr djuk laÒo ugha fd og ihfM+rk dh ÝkWd Fkh ftldh Mh,u, ijh{kk dh xÃ & naM çfØ;k lafgrk dh èkkjk 313 d¢ vèkhu ijh{kk d¢ n©jku vihykFkÊ dk lkeuk Mh,u, çfrosnu ls ugha djk;k x;k blfy, mldk mi;¨x vihykFkÊ d¢ fo#) ugha fd;k tk ldrkA ¼iSjk 13½
¼5½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & èkkjk 313 & ç;¨tu & vfÒ;qDr d¨ lk{; esa mld¢ fo#) çrhr g¨us okyh fdlh Òh ifjfLFkfr dk Li"Vhdj.k nsus dk volj fn;k tkuk pkfg, & oLrqr% ;g èkkjk uSlfxZd U;k; d¢ fl)kar¨a dk dkuwuh vkdkj esa lafgrkdj.k gS & ewy ç;¨tu vfÒ;qDr d¨ fu"i{k fopkj.k nsuk rFkk ;g lqfuf'pr djuk gS fd U;k;ky; }kjk mldk è;ku vijkèk esa Qalkus okyh leLr lkexzh ij yk;k tk, rkfd og viuk Li"Vhdj.k ns ld¢ & U;k;ky; vijkèk esa Qalkus okyh leLr lkexzh ij vfÒ;qDr dk è;ku ykus d¢ fy, okè; gh ugha] vfirq mls ,slk vfÒ;qDr dh gSfl;r d¢ O;fDr d¨ le> vkus okyh Òk"kk esa djuk pkfg,A ¼2004½ 7 ,l lh lh 502] ¼2005½ 6 ,l lhlh 101] ¼2008½ 16 ,l lh lh 328] ¼2014½ 10 ,l lh lh 270] ¼2019½ 18 ,l lh lh 161 rFkk ¼2020½ 10 ,l lh lh 108 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 74 ,oa 80½
¼6½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & èkkjk 313 & U;k;ky; dk drZO; & èkkjk 313 d¢ vèkhu vfÒ;qDr v©j U;k;ky; d¢ eè; ijLij laokn dh mis{kk ugha dh tk ldrh rFkk d¨jh v©ipkfjdrk ek= cukus ugha fn;k tk ldrk & mDr çfØ;k] lqlaxr ç'u¨a dh rS;kjh rFkk ;gka rd fd mÙkj¨a d¢ vfÒys[ku d¨ Òh] ckg~; L=¨r ls mikIr djus ugha fn;k tk ldrk & ;g fyfidoxÊ; ÑR; ugha & ;g egRoiw.kZ ÑR; Lo;a ihBklhu U;k;kèkh'k }kjk vfrlkoèkkuh ls fd;k tkuk vko';d gS & vfÒ;qDr ls ijLij laokn djrs le; U;k;ky;¨a }kjk i;kZIr lkoèkkuh v©j lrdZrk cjrh tkuk g¨rh gS & U;k;ky;¨a }kjk U;k; fd;k tkuk g¨rk gS] U;k; dk fuiVkjk ughaA nkafMd vihy Øekad 859 lu~ 2010 fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 82½
¼7½ lk{; vfèkfu;e] 1872 & èkkjk 54 & iwoZ vkpj.k & vihykFkÊ dk foxr vkpj.k ç'uxr rF; ugha Fkk & vihykFkÊ us viuk iwoZrj vPNk pfj= lkfcr djus dk dnkfi ç;kl ugha fd;k & vU; fdlh Òh fu.kkZ;d lk{; d¢ vÒko esa] foxr vkpj.k egRoghu g¨ tkrk gS & rc v©j Òh tc vihykFkÊ dk d¨Ã vkijkfèkd vfÒys[k ugha rFkk vfÒ;¨tui{k lk{kh vuqJqr lk{kh Fks ;k mUg¨aus dÒh vihykFkÊ d¢ fo#) d¨Ã f'kdk;r ugha dhA 2015 ¼4½ ØkbEl 366 ¼,l lh½] ¼1977½ 3 ,l lh lh 268] ¼2007½ 12 ,l lh lh 288 rFkk ¼2019½ ¼1½ ts ,y ts 51 ¼mPpre U;k;ky;½ % ¼2019½ 12 ,l lh lh 460 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 85½
¼8½ U;kf;d¢rj laLohÑfr & ek= blfy, R;Dr ugha dh tk ldrh fd og U;kf;d¢rj laLohÑfr gS & laLohÑfr mRÑ"V xq.koÙkk dh rFkk vkjŒ es=h d¢ fu.kZ; esa vfèkdfFkr vU; ekunaM¨a d¨ iwjk djus okyh & n¨"kflf) vfÒfyf[kr djus dk ,dek= vkèkkj g¨ ldrh gSA ¼2022½ 6 ,l lh lh 525 vuqlfjrA ¼2012½ 11 ,l lh lh 768] ¼2012½ 6 ,l lh lh 403 rFkk , vkb vkj 2015 ,l lh 3686 fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 88½
¼9½ U;kf;d¢rj laLohÑfr & lk{kh us LohÑr :i ls vihykFkÊ dh rFkkdfFkr U;kf;d¢rj laLohd`fr dk rF; fdlh d¨ çdV ugha fd;k & çfrijh{kk d¢ n©jku fu"diV 'kCn¨a esa dgk fd ;fn iqfyl mld¢ ikl vkdj mlls ugha iwNrh r¨ og fdlh d¨ Òh ;g rF; çdV ugha djrk & mld¢ dFku d¨ osnokD; ekuuk v©j laiw.kZ n¨"kflf) ml ij vkèkkfjr djuk fujkin ughaA , vkb vkj 1959 ,l lh 18] ¼1973½ 4 ,l lh lh 17] ¼1971½ 3 ,l lh lh 778] ¼2010½ 8 ,l lh lh 233 rFkk , vkb vkj 1979 ,l lh 1620 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 92½
¼10½ U;kf;d¢rj laLohÑfr & rdZiw.kZ ifjfLFkfr;¨a dh J`a[kyk }kjk lefFkZr g¨ rFkk vU; vfÒ;¨tui{k lkf{k;¨a }kjk Òh laiq"V g¨ r¨ vfèkd fo'okl ;¨X; v©j lkf{;d ewY; dh g¨ tkrh gS & tc vU; ifjfLFkfr;¨a ls vfÒ;¨tu i{kdFku l'kDr ugha g¨rk r¨ d¢oy dkWy d¢ C;©j¨a dk fooj.k U;kf;d¢rj laLohÑfr dk vuqe¨nu djus d¢ fy, i;kZIr ughaA ¼2022½ 6 ,l lh lh 525 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 94 ,oa 95½
¼11½ naM lafgrk] 1860 & èkkjk 363] 366] 376¼2½¼M+½] 376 d] [k] 302 rFkk 201 & ikfjfLFkfrd lk{; ij vkèkkfjr ekeyk & vfÒ;¨tui{k }kjk ifjfLFkfr;¨a dh laiw.kZ J`a[kyk ;FkkZFkrk v©j lVhdrk ls fl) dh tkuk visf{kr & vUos"k.k vR;fèkd ykijokg v©j xwढ+ jhfr esa fd;k x;k & ihfM+rk d¢ uk[kwu d¢ uewus çFke volj ij ugha fy, x, & dqN fnu i'pkr~ mld¢ xM+s gq, 'ko d¨ [k¨n dj fudky dj fy, x, & mudk lkf{;d ewY; dkQh u"V g¨ x;k g¨xk & ihfM+rk dh ÝkWd dk] t¨ vR;ar egRoiw.kZ lk{; Fkh] d¨Ã Òh Nk;kfp= vfÒys[k ij çLrqr ugha fd;k x;k & fofÒUu vfÒ;¨tui{k lkf{k;¨a d¢ vuqlkj ÝkWd d¢ fooj.k@igpku esa QdZ & fu.kkZ;d :i ls fl) ugha fd;k tk ldk fd ihfM+rk dh ÝkWd Mh,u, ijh{k.k d¢ fy, Òsth xÃ Fkh & fupyk U;k;ky; Mh,u, çfrosnu ls lacafèkr lqlaxr ç'u fojfpr djus v©j iwNus esa vlQy jgk & vfÒ;¨tui{k viuk i{kdFku ;qfDr;qDr lansg d¢ ijs fl) ugha dj ldk & lansg dk Qk;nk nsrs gq, vihykFkÊ n¨"keqDrA 1984 ¼4½ ,l lh lh 116] ¼2002½ 1 ,l lh lh 679 rFkk ¼1980½ 2 ,l lh lh 684 vuqlfjrA ¼2002½ 2 ,l lh lh 220] nkafMd funsZ'k Øekad 5 lu~ 2015 fu.kÊr fnukad 3-3-2016] nkafMd funsZ'k Øekad 2 lu~ 2016 rFkk , vkb vkj 2013 ,l lh 3817 fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 97] 99 ls 101½
¼12½ nkafMd fopkj.k & 'kCn ^^thou rFkk ^^QkbZy esa ogh v{kj gSa & çR;sd ^^Qkby* dk ^^thou** ls lacaèk gS & ije lkoèkkuh] lrdZrk v©j laosnu'khyrk ls lapkfyr djuk vko';dA ¼iSjk 102½
¼13½ vUos"k.k & vUos"k.k esa rduhdh =qfV & =qfV U;k;gkfu esa ifj.kr g¨rh gS r¨ gLr{ksi vo';aÒkoh gS & iqfyl ij fdruk Òh dk;Z dk ncko ;k vU; d¨Ã ncko g¨] og fofèk dh vis{kk d¨ ruq djus dk dkj.k ugha g¨ ldrkA ¼iSjk 103½

JUDGMENT

1. This Criminal Appeal filed under section 374(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the Criminal Reference assail the judgment dated 8.3.2019 passed by Special Judge (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012), Burhanpur in Special Sessions Case No.30/2018 whereby the appellant was held guilty for committing certain offences and directed to undergo sentences which are mentioned in tabular form as under:-

S. No.	Conviction under Sections	Sentenced to undergo
1.	363 of the I.P.C.	R.I. for seven years and fine of Rs. 2000/- in default to suffer R.I. for 3 years.
2.	366 of the I.P.C.	R.I. for ten years and fine of Rs. 2000/- in default to suffer R.I. for 3 years.
3.	376(2)(m) of the I.P.C.	Life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 2000/- in default to suffer R.I. for 3 years.
4.	376AB of I.P.C. (Amendment Act 2018)	Capital punishment and fine of Rs. 2000/- in default to suffer R.I. for 3 years.
5.	302 of IPC	Capital punishment and fine of Rs. 2000/- in default to suffer R.I. for 3 years.
6.	201 of I.P.C.	R.I. for seven years and fine of Rs. 2000/- in default to suffer R.I. for 3 years.
7.	5(i)(k)(m)(r) read with 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.	Life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 2000/- in default to suffer R.I. for 3 years.

With the direction that all sentences shall run concurrently.

Factual Background :-

2. Draped in brevity, the case of prosecution is that father of victim, a resident of village Mohad alongwith his wife went to work in his agricultural field. The victim aged about 3 years went with her grandmother to answer the call of nature in-front of his house. The grandmother while permitting the victim to answer the call of nature came to the house to attend another granddaughter. After about 15 minutes at around 11 AM on 15.8.2018 when she returned back to the place where victim was leftover by her, she could not trace her. She immediately informed the parents of the victim and other neighbours/villagers. A ‘Gum insan’ Report was lodged. In turn, police called a dog squad and the trained dogs after sniffing the clothes and slippers of victim, travelled on kachcha roads of the village and thereafter stopped at one place. The police searched various places to recover the victim. On 18.8.2018 at Bambhada Road which is at the distance of one kilometer, the dead body of victim was found by passerby Sayed Jalil and Sharif Shah. Another witness Kalyan Singh Rajput informed the villagers about the dead body of the victim near Chindiya Nala.

3. In turn, ‘Merg’ Intimation was recorded. The short post mortem (PM) of victim was followed by a detailed post mortem by a team of doctors. In view of post mortem report, offences under sections 366A, 376(2)(m), 376AB, 302 and 201 of IPC were added.

4. During the investigation, appellant was found to be of suspicious character and was arrested on 23.8.2018. As per the prosecution story, the appellant used to keep an evil eye on the minor girls of the village. In addition, it is alleged that he had unnatural sex with a buffalo. Appellant married twice but both the marriages became unsuccessful. During interrogation of appellant, certain bruises were found on the forehead and cheeks of the appellant. The defence of appellant was that he sustained such injuries in a vehicle accident. The appellant was examined by the doctor and as per his opinion, the said bruises could have been caused by nails and not because of any motorcycle accident. The prosecution upon receiving this report of doctor, obtained permission from Sub Divisional Officer (SDO), Burhanpur to recover the dead body of victim which was buried few days back so that sample of nail cuttings of victim can be taken and sent for examination. The nails of victim were collected and sent to Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL). As per the case o