Advocates:
D. S. MAHRAK. V. SREEKUMAR

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Page 1 of 7

CASE NO.:

Appeal (crl.) 1119-1120 1998

PETITIONER:

STATE, GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

Vs.

RESPONDENT:

SUNIL AND ANOTHER

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 29/11/2000

BENCH:

K.T.Thomas, R.P.Sethi

JUDGMENT:

THOMAS, J. Two sex maniacs libidinously ravaged a

tiny female tot like wild beasts and finished her off.

Police after investigation found that the two respondents

herein are those two fiends. A Sessions Court upheld the

said police version as correct. He sentenced one of them to

death penalty and the other to life imprisonment, but a

Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi declined to

believe the police version as true and consequently the two

respondents were acquitted. This appeal by the State is by

special leave.

The little girl was Anuradha and she was aged only

four. She was fondly taken away from her mothers house on

the forenoon of 5.9.1992. Her dead body was taken up by her

mother on the same night from the house of first accused

Sunil. When the doctor conducted autopsy on the dead body

he described the dimensions of the imprints left in the

infantile body reflecting a horrible sexual molestation

inflicted on the child. Next day the police arrested the

two accused (A1-Sunil and A2-Ramesh) and after completing

the investigation charge-sheeted both of them for offences

under Sections 364, 376, 377 and 302 read with Section 34 of

the Indian Penal Code. After the trial the sessions court

convicted both of them under all the aforesaid counts and

sentenced A2 Ramesh to death and A1 Sunil to imprisonment

for life on the charge of murder and awarded lesser

sentences for the remaining counts.

Details of the prosecution case are the following:

Anuradhas mother Sharda (PW10) was known to A1 Sunil and

his mother (Giano Devi). Sharda had stayed in the house of

Giano Devi for a few days and their acquaintance became

closer. Sharda was working in a tube-light manufacturing

factory during those days. As she needed a place to live in

Giano Devi arranged a small hutment (Jhuggi) with the help

of another lady (PW8 Tara) who was residing close-by. On

the occurrence day Sharda went to the factory for work

leaving her child Anuradha in the custody of PW8-Tara. At

about 11 A.M. Sunil visited them and expressed to PW8-Tara

that he would take the child and her clothes as well as some

domestic utensils to PW10. Though PW8 suggested that this

should be done only if Sharda permits, A1-Sunil took the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Page 2 of 7

child and her clothes and the utensils from his house during

a short time when PW8-Tara had gone out to fetch milk. When

she came home in the night she learnt from PW8-Tara that her

child was taken away by Sunil. So she went to Sunils

house. It was about 9.00 P.M. then. To her dismay she

found her little child lying completely nude next to

A2-Ramesh, on the second floor of the house, who was then

deep in his sleep. Then Sunil, who was found in an

inebriated mood, hurled a remark that I have dispatched

Anuradha to heaven. She felt concerned as to what would

have happened to the child. It was then she realised that

her child was breathless. PW10- Sharda then took the child

to the hospital, but the doctor who examined her pronounced

her dead.

PW1 - Dr. Basant Lal conducted the autopsy on the

dead body of the child at 12.00 noon on 7.9.1992. In his

opinion the child would have died about 36 to 48 hours prior

to the autopsy. He gave full details in his post-mortem

report about the features noticed by him on the dead body.

The corpse was full of abrasions and contusions. The

prominent among them were counted by the doctor as 25 in

number and he described the situs and dimensions of all of

them. Among them, oval fashio