Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(UK) 894
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Ravindra Maithani, Ashish Naithani, JJ
Mool Chandra – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 143 of 2019 | Criminal jail Appeal No. 11 of 2019
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Sexual Offences
Act Referred
Headnote
(B) Evidence - Forensic evidence - Absence of seizure memo or chain of custody documents for forensic exhibits prevents forensic findings from being treated as conclusive proof. (Paras 59, 62)
Facts of the case:
A girl with an intellectual disability went missing and was found in a frightened condition with signs of sexual assault. Accused persons were identified via CCTV footage and circumstantial evidence. Trial court convicted the appellants for various offences including kidnapping and gang rape.
Findings of Court:
The court found the forensic evidence against one accused insufficient due to a broken chain of custody. The kidnapping conviction for the other accused was upheld based on circumstantial evidence, but rape charges were dropped due to lack of scientific proof.
Issues: Whether the appellants were guilty of kidnapping and gang rape, and whether the forensic evidence provided sufficient proof to sustain the conviction.
Ratio Decidendi: Conviction cannot rest on suspicion; it requires rigorous proof. Failure to maintain an unbroken chain of custody for biological exhibits invalidates forensic evidence, and scientific findings alone cannot ground a conviction without procedural transparency.
Result: Appeal filed by the second appellant allowed; conviction for sexual offences set aside.
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mahavir Kohli, Asif Ali
For the Respondents: J.S. Virk
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. establishing the factual background of the case, including missing person reports and initial medical observations. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. discussion of medical findings and forensic evidence collected during the initial investigation. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 3. appellants' and state's arguments regarding the validity of evidence, forensic conclusions, and credibility of electronic evidence. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 4. analyzing the chain of custody of forensic exhibits and the impact of its deficiencies on judicial decision-making. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63) |
| 5. legal evaluation of culpability regarding kidnapping and the evidentiary threshold required for sexual assault convictions. (Para 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82) |
As Per Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J.
1. These connected criminal appeals, namely Criminal Appeal No. 143 of 2019 and Criminal Jail Appeal No. 11 of 2019, have been preferred under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the Appellants, challenging the common judgment and order of conviction dated 18.02.2019 passed by the learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Haldwani, District Nainital, in Sessions Trial No. 45 of 2018, arising out of FIR No. 33 of 2018, Police Station Banbhulpura, District Nainital. Since both appeals arise out of the same judgment, pertain to the same incident, and are founded on common evidence, they are being heard and decided together by this common judgment.
2. By the impugned judgment, the Appellants were convicted for offences punishable under Sections 363, 366-A, 376(2)(l), and 376-D of the Indian Penal Code, and were sentenced to undergo varying terms of rigorous imprisonment,directing that all sentences shall run concurrently.
3. The case of the State, in brief, is that a missing person report was lodged by the brother of the victim at Police Station Banbhoolpura, Haldwani, on 08.03.2018. The report stated that the victim was a girl aged about 13 years (with the question of age being a matter arising on the record) and that she was suffering from intellectual disability and had difficulty with speech. It was reported that she had gone missing from her residence on 07.03.2018 at about 4:00 p.m.
4. The victim was found the next day at about 11:30 p.m., at a distance of approximately 50 meters ahead of Awla Chauki Gate, near a petrol pump. She was found alone and in a frightened condition. She was taken back to her home, where her mother noticed that she was wearing a blood-stained pyjama and had black marks on her body. The State case further is that the victim, through gestures and signs, communicated to her mother that she had been sexually assaulted and beaten by two persons.
5. While searching for the victim, her brother came across CCTV footage obtained from a camera installed at the Power House situated on Himalayan School Road. In the said footage, the victim was seen being led by a person holding her hand and taking her towards Awla Chauki Gate on Gaula Bypass Road. The brother of the victim took a snapshot of the CCTV footage on his mobile phone and, on the basis of this clue, continued efforts to trace the victim.
6. Thereafter, on enquiries, the person seen accompanying the victim in the footage was identified as Mool Chandra, son of Gothi Lal. It was further stated that on the previous night, a girl with intellectual disability and short hair was seen in the company of Mool Chandra and his associate Bhup Singh, who was stated to be a driver, and that both were seen loitering around in the area. These facts were reported at the police station.
7. The victim was medically examined after about three days of the incident at the Government Female Hospital, Haldwani,
