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

2024 Supreme(MP) 440

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Vivek Agarwal and Devnarayan Mishra, JJ.
Ram Prasad Ahirwar & Another v. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Others
Criminal Appeal No. 885 of 2021 and Criminal Reference No. 1 of 2021 (Jabalpur): against the judgment dated 19.1.2021 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Banda, District Sagar in Special Sessions Case No. 49/2020; Decided on 16.10.2024

Advocates:
Manish Datt with Dilip Singh Parihar for appellants;
Aditya Narayan Gutpa, Government Advocate for respondents/State.

The court emphasized the need for credible evidence in establishing the victim's age in sexual offences and the exceptional nature required to impose death penalties, particularly in cases involving familial relationships.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 363, 366, 376(DB), 302, 201 - Conviction and sentencing for offences of kidnapping, rape, murder, and destruction of evidence - The trial court sentenced one accused to death penalty and the other to life imprisonment. The age of the victim was contested but established to be below the legal threshold for statutory rape. The court emphasized that while the conviction was based on DNA evidence, shortcomings in investigation were observed, including handling of evidence and identification of witnesses. (Paras 1-84)

Facts of the case:
Appellant No.1 is the real brother and Appellant No.2 is the uncle of the victim, who went missing and was later found murdered, notably headless. The victim's age was officially claimed to be under 12 years, influencing the court's decision on the statutory rape charge.

Findings of Court:
Conviction of Appellant No.1 is upheld but the death penalty was converted to life imprisonment due to mitigating factors including socio-economic background and remorse. Appellant No.2 is acquitted due to insufficient evidence.

Issues: Primary questions were the age of the victim at the time of the crime, the handling of evidence, and the sufficiency of the prosecution’s case.

Ratio Decidendi: The court acknowledged the burden of proof on the prosecution regarding the victim's age and emphasized the necessity of clear evidence, not just assumptions based on circumstantial evidence. It reinforced that the death penalty should be exceptional and justified by exceptional circumstances. The court highlighted the flaws in evidence collection and the importance of reliable witness testimony to uphold a conviction. (Paras 58-78)

Result: Death penalty was modified to life imprisonment for Appellant No.1; Appellant No.2 was acquitted.

Table of Content
1. criminal appeal details and convictions outlined. (Para 1 , 2)
2. background of victim's abduction and discovery. (Para 3 , 4 , 65)
3. arguments regarding victim's age questioned. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
4. counsel cited various precedents on admissibility of evidence. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 17 , 18 , 19)
5. concerns over authenticity of forensic evidence. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)
6. chain of evidence brought into question for prosecutions. (Para 24 , 25 , 30 , 31 , 32)
7. legal standards for circumstantial evidence discussed. (Para 33 , 34)
8. government advocate asserts evidence supports conviction. (Para 35 , 36 , 37)
9. court's evaluation of legal standards regarding evidence. (Para 38 , 44 , 46 , 47)
10. death penalty considerations and reasoning explained. (Para 39 , 40 , 58 , 59)
11. discussion on mitigating factors in sentencing. (Para 60 , 61 , 62 , 70)
12. conclusion regarding sentencing discrepancies. (Para 78 , 79)
13. final sentencing and appeal conclusions drawn. (Para 80 , 81 , 82 , 83)

JUDGMENT

Agarwal, J. -- 1. Criminal Appeal No.885/2021 is filed on behalf of Appellant No.1 Ram Prasad Ahirwar & Appellant No.2 Banshilal Ahirwar and Criminal Reference No.1/2021 is received from learned Additional Sessions Judge-Banda, District Sagar in pursuance of judgment dated 19.1.2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-Banda, District Sagar in Special Sessions Case No.49/2020 convicting Appellant No.1 Ram Prasad Ahirwar for the offence under sections 363, 366, 376(DB), 302, 201 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (for brevity “I.P.C”) and sentencing him to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for Seven Years, Seven Years, Death Penalty, Death Penalty, Rigorous Imprisonment for Seven Years with fine of Rs.1,000/, Rs.1,000/-, Rs.500/-, Rs.500/-, Rs.1,000/- respectively and in default of payment of fine to further undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for One Month for each of the offences.

2. Vide impugned judgment dated 19.1.2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-Banda, District Sagar in Special Sessions Case No.49/2020 Appellant No.2 Banshilal Ahirwar has been convicted for the offence under sections 376(DB), 302, 201 of the I.P.C and sentenced to suffer Death Penalty, Death Penalty, Rigorous Imprisonment for Seven Years with fine of Rs.1,000/-, Rs.1,000/-, Rs.1,000/- respectively and in default of payment of fine to further undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for One Month for each of the offences.

3. The prosecution case in short is that the victim/deceased while studying in Class-VI had left her home on 13.3.2019 for giving examinations at Bhadrana Government School and when she did not return back till 12 Noon then Complainant/PW.1 (father of victim/deceased) and his wife (mother of victim/deceased) started searching the victim/deceased and it was informed by the School Authority that she had not come to give examinations. On 14.3.2019 PW.1, father of victim/deceased, lodged a missing person report at Police Station Banda, District Sagar alleging that he is a labourer, he has two daughters and three sons, the victim/deceased is student of Class-VI, she is 4 feet of height, her complexion is dusky, she was in school dress but did not return back to home. At his instance, Missing Person Report was registered vide Exhibit P/9 at Police Station Banda, District Sagar registering case pertaining to Crime No.195/2019 for the offence under section 363 of the I.P.C and on the basis of the said Missing Person Report, the First Information Report was lodged by Assistant Sub Inspector R.S.Vishwakarma (PW.7) vide Exhibit P/10 and the case was taken in investigation.

4. During investigation, Ganni (PW.18) informed that he had visited the fields of Rambhagat Yadav for harvesting Gram Crops and when he was returning to his residence at about 5:00 PM then in the fields of Shankar Yadav, he saw dead body of a girl. He reported that the body was lying without head. The aforesaid fact was narrated by him to Co-Villager Vikram Sing

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
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