IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
Hemant Gupta, CJ, Vijay Kumar Shukla, J.
Criminal Reference No. 01 of 2018
In Reference [Received from Special Judge, Court of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, District Shahdol (M.P.)]
Versus
Vinod alias Rahul Chouhtha - Respondent/Accused
Criminal Appeal No. 2151 of 2018
Vinod alias Rahul Chouhtha - Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh, P.S. Kotwali, Shahdol (M.P.) – Respondent
Criminal Reference No. 01 & 2151 of 2018
Decided On : 08-08-2018
Hemant Gupta, CJ.
The present Reference arises out of a judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned Special Judge (Under the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012), Shahdol (M.P.) on 28.02.2018 thereby convicting respondent Vinod alias Rahul Chouhtha for an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "the IPC") and sentencing him to death by hanging. The said respondent has been further convicted under Section 376A of IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life and also convicted under Section 5/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. All sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
2. The convict has filed Criminal Appeal No.2151/2018 against the said judgment. Therefore, both the reference and appeal are taken up for final hearing together.
3. The first information report (Ex.P-1) was lodged at 1.59 a.m. on 14.05.2017 in respect of missing of the daughter of Kallu Kahar between 9 a.m. to 9.10 a.m. on 13.05.2017. The statement is that he has two children; one girl aged four years and a boy aged two years. He had gone to work in village Jaithari but at about 11 a.m. on 13.05.2017 his wife Smt. Geeta Kahar phoned him to say that his daughter has gone missing at about 9 a.m. He came back and tried to locate their daughter along with his wife. Since they were not successful in locating the child, it was apprehended that she has been kidnapped by alluring. She was wearing a frock of blue colour; knew the name of her parents; her face is round; whitish colour and hair small. Such report was recorded by Shri Vedmani Sharma, Head Constable.
4. On the basis of such report, a missing person report (Ex.P-2) was lodged at about 2.14 a.m. PW-19 Rakesh Mishra is the person who was working as Assistant Sub-Inspector in Police Station Kotwali, Shahdol. He, in witness box, deposed that at about 23.30 hours, Kallu Kahar reported the missing report of his daughter but such report was typed and uploaded on computer, therefore, time of lodging of report is mentioned as 1.59 a.m., but, in fact, it was received at 23.30 hours. On the basis of such report (Ex.P-1) in Rojnamcha, a missing person report was lodged on computer, which is Ex.P-2. The entry in Rojnamcha Sanha is at Serial No.74 whereas the computer printout is Ex.P-23. Copy of Ex.P-1 was sent to the concerned Court, which stands acknowledged.
5. PW-21 is Rajni Nagbhire, Sub-Inspector, Police Station Kotwali, Shahdol, who was entrusted with the investigation. She started investigation at 9.30 a.m. on 14.05.2017 and joined the parents of the girl in investigation. She prepared the site plan (Ex.P-10) as per the statement of Geeta Kahar, mother of the girl. On the same day, she recorded the statement of the landlady Beti Bai, where the parents of the girl were tenants. On her statement, it was found that there is one person by the name of Vinod, who offered chocolate biscuit etc. to the girl and took her with him. It was also found that a boy called Kailash has seen the girl and the said person walking together. The boy Kailash was searched in the area of bus stand and it was found that he was working on the shop of a shoemaker. He disclosed that he can identify the person with whom he has seen the girl. Kailash also informed her that he had asked the girl as to where she was going. The said person was taking the girl towards the petrol pump.
6. During the investigations, it was found that the person with whom the girl has gone is Vinod, who can be identified by Kailash. She went to the house of Vinod on 14.05.2017 but came to know that he has gone out. On 15.05.2017, she went to the house of the accused with Kailash but was informed that he can be found out near the petrol pump. She came towards the petrol pump along with her staff and witness Kailash. They
Ankush Maruti Shinde and others vs. State of Maharashtra
Anthony D’souza v. State of Karnataka
B.A. Umesh vs. Registrar General, High Court of Karnataka
B.A. Umesh vs. Registrar General, High Court of Karnataka
Bachan Singh vs. State of Punjab
Bantu vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Bhagwan Das and another vs. State of Rajasthan
Bodhraj alias Bodha and others vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir
Deepak Rai etc. vs. State of Bihar
Dhananjaoy Chatterjee V. State of W.B.
Dharam Deo Yadav vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Gurvail Singh @ Gala and Anr. v. State of Punjab
Krishan Kumar Malik v. State of Haryana
Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab
Madan Singh vs. State of Rajasthan
Mohfil Khan and Anr. v. State of Jharkhand
Mukesh and another vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and others
Nandlal Wasudeo Badwaik vs. Lata Nandlal Badwaik and another
Om Prakash v. State of Haryana
Phool Kumar vs. Delhi Administration
Purushottam Dashrath Borate and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra
Santosh Kumar Singh vs. State through CBI
Shabnam etc. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Shankar Kisanrao Khade v. State of Maharashtra
Shyam Narain V. State (NCT of Delhi)
Sunil vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
gpt-4
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.