Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
Sri Justice Sambasivarao Naidu, P. SAM KOSHY, JJ
The State of Telangana – Appellant
Versus
Dinesh Kumar Dharne – Respondent
Referred Trial No.1 of 2021 | Criminal Appeal No.448 of 2023 | S.C.No.592 of 2018
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the case and accused's background. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. details of the crime and evidence collected. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. trial court's judgment and confirmation request. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. appellant's arguments against the conviction. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. focus on procedural flaws in the trial. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 6. witness testimonies and their implications. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 7. evidence of the confession and its admissibility. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38) |
| 8. medical evidence supporting the prosecution. (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 42) |
| 9. dna evidence linking the appellant to the crime. (Para 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48) |
| 10. discussion on sentencing principles. (Para 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55) |
| 11. legal precedents on capital punishment. (Para 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60) |
| 12. factors determining the 'rarest of rare' doctrine. (Para 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66) |
| 13. societal implications of the crime and sentencing. (Para 67 , 68 , 69 , 70) |
| 14. final considerations on sentencing. (Para 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75) |
| 15. conclusion on the appropriateness of the death penalty. (Para 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80) |
| 16. impact of the crime on the victim's family. (Para 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 , 85) |
| 17. final remarks on the case and sentencing. (Para 86 , 87 , 88 , 89 , 90) |
| 18. assessment of the appellant's actions and mindset. (Para 91 , 92 , 93 , 94 , 95) |
| 19. final ruling and confirmation of the sentence. (Para 96 , 97 , 98 , 99) |
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Per The Hon’ble Sri Justice Sambasivarao Naidu This referred trial arose with the letter received from Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District, dated 19.02.2021, whereunder he sought confirmation of death sentence imposed in a sessions case vide S.C.No.592 of 2018 against the sole accused. Since the accused also filed an appeal, challenging the said Judgment, we have heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and counsel to whom the criminal appeal was referred by the legal-aid committee, together and disposing them under this Judgment.
2. Before discussing the grounds under which the appellant/accused sought for setting aside the Judgment, his conviction and sentence and also the letter from trial Court, it is just required to examine the contents of charge sheet filed against the appellant, charges framed against him, details of the evidence as well as arguments advanced by prosecution and defense.
3. The appellant herein has been prosecuted by the State, through police, Narsingi, with an allegation that he kidnapped a girl of five (5) years, committed rape on her and killed her. Thereby committed the offences under Section 363, 366 , 376(A) , 302 of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘ IPC ’) and under Section 5(l)(m) and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short ‘POCSO Act’).
4. The following is the case of prosecution in brief: PW1 Smt.Ambika Mishra and PW2 Mr.Saradi Prasanna Mishra is wife and husband and hails from Ender Village of Odissa State. They have got two(2) children, a girl aged about five(5) years and a boy aged about two(2) years. They, in search of their livelihood, migrated to Hyderabad and were working with Arya Mithra Constructions, Alkapuri, Hyderabad.
5. The appellant hails from Kalimati Village of Madhya Pradesh and he too came to this State for eking livelihood and was working for the same construction company.
6. The prosecution has alleged that on 12.12.2017 at about 12:00 in the noon, the appellant took the daughter of PWs 1 and 2 who (hereinafter be referred as ‘SM’) on the pretext of giving chocolate towards a kirana shop. Later, he alone returned to the labour camp where all these workers were provided accommodation. When PW1 enquired him about her daughter, the appellant told her that he left SM at labour camp and she might be playing somewhere. PW1 and her family members searched for the girl in the colony, but could not found her. Therefore, PW1 appr
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
