Madhya Pradesh High Court
Anand Koal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 September, 2022
Author: Sujoy Paul
Bench: Sujoy Paul, Prakash Chandra Gupta
- 1 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
SHRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
&
SHRI JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.4162 OF 2020
Between :-
ANAND KOL, S/O HARIPRASAD KOL,
AGED 25 YEARS, BY OCCUPATION
LABOUR, R/O MIDLI TORIYA, THANA
SUATALA, DISTRICT NARSINGHPUR,
M.P.
....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI ABHAY GUPTA, ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT)
AND
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH,
THROUGH, POLICE STATION DISTRICT
NARSINGHPUR, (MP)
....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI YASH SONI, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
CRRFC No.04 OF 2020
Between :-
IN REFERENCE
....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI IMTIYAZ HUSSAIN, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH SHRI
MOHD. SAJJID KHAN AS AMICUS CURIAE)
AND
ANAND KOL, S/O HARIPRASAD KOL,
AGED 25 YEARS, R/O MIDLI TORIYA,
THANA SUATALA, DISTRICT
NARSINGHPUR, M.P.
....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI ABHAY GUPTA, ADVOCATE)
- 2 -
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reserved on : 01/09/2022
Delivered on : 08/09/2022
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JUDGMENT
Sujoy Paul, J. :-
The Death Reference and Criminal Appeal are arising out of impugned judgment dated 17.03.2020 passed in Case No. SC ATR 02/2020, whereby appellant was held guilty for committing the offences and sentenced as under :-
Serial CONVICTION SENTENCE No. 1. Under Section 302 of IPC. Death Sentence. To be hanged till death. 2. Under Section 366 of the I.P.C. RI for ten (10) years and fine of Rs.2,000/- only. In default of payment of fine further R.I. for 01 month. 3. Under Section 364 of the I.P.C. Life Imprisonment and fine of Rs.2,000/- only. In default of payment of fine, further R.I. for one (01) month. 4. Under Section 449 of I.P.C. Life Imprisonment and fine of Rs.2,000/- only. In default of payment of fine, further R.I. for one (01) month. 5 Under Section 06 read with 5(m) of Death Sentence. To be hanged till Protection of Children from Sexual death. Offences Act, 2012
All sentences shall run concurrently. In the above death sentence, it was directed that the appellant be hanged by the neck till his death.
THE FACTUAL BACKGROUND :-
2. As per the prosecution story, victim belonged to a notified Scheduled Tribe of Madhya Pradesh, i.e. 'Gond'. The victim was a student of Class-2 and on 22nd of November 2019, she was sleeping with her parents, grand parents and other family members in the premises of
- 3 -
her house in Midhlitoriya, Barban, District Narsinghpur. At around 12.30 night the mother of the victim (PW-1) found that the victim, who was sleeping between her and grand mother is missing. She promptly raised an alarm and the family members started searching the victim. When victim could not be found, on 23 rd of November 2019 at 2 A.M., a missing person report, (Ex.P-2) was registered. In addition, an offence under Section 363 of IPC in Crime No.412/2019 was also registered. During the course of investigation, a spot map of the house from where the victim went missing was prepared and marked as Ex.P-6. On the next day, i.e. on 24th of November 2019 at around 15:30 O'clock the dead body of the victim was found in village Chabarpatha, Patwari Halka No. 44, Tahsil Tendukheda, District Narsinghpur. The body was found in Kh. No.154/2 belonging to one Mukesh Sen. A merg panchanama, (Ex.P-5) was prepared. The spot map of this place, (Ex.P-29) was prepared. The slacks and underwear of the deceased were seized by Ex.P-18. The blood stained soil and plain soil, nail cuttings of nails of both the hands of deceased and three small hair found on the right hand of deceased were recovered through Ex.P-19. The dead body of the victim was sent to District Hospital, Narsinghpur.
3. In turn, a team of Doctors conducted the postmortem. Two vaginal swab slides, two anus swab slides and two oral swab slides were prepared. In addition, blood sample of the deceased was taken and her frock, which she was wearing was also recovered. The sealed material were handed over to Police Constable Rajesh Rajput for sending it for chemical examination.
4. On the basis of suspicion, the blood samples of Dinesh @ Munde Rajak, Bheem Jharia, Ranjeet Thakur and Vijay Thakur were taken on 26th of November 2019 and their blood samples were sent for DNA examination. Based on informer's information, appellant was intercepted.
- 4 -
As per the information given by appellant, one bulb and his clothes were recovered through Ex.P/22 and P/23. The statement of appellant was recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Narsinghpur on 30th of November 2019. His blood sample was also taken for DNA test.
5. The matter was ultimately committed to the Special Court. Both the accused persons abjured the guilt. However, present appellant as per the finding of the court below admitted that age of deceased was six years. Similarly, another accused person namely Dinesh @ Munde accepted that age of deceased was six years but denied other allegations. He took a defence that mother of deceased had animosity with him. The court below framed seventeen questions for its determination.
6. The Court below considered the Caste Certificate (Ex. P/10) of mother of deceased issued by the competent authority. As per this certificate, she belongs to 'Gond' (ST Community).
7. The next question determined by the Court was relating to age of the victim. The progress report of victim Ex.P/16 was produced. The In- charge Headmaster Shri Kamal (P.W.8) produced the admission register wherein the date of birth of victim is mentioned as 1st July, 2013. The same date of birth is mentioned in the aforesaid progress report Ex.P/16. Considering the statement of mother of victim (P.W.1), progress report, admission register and photographs, the Court below came to hold that the date of birth of deceased was 1st July, 2013 and on the date of incident she was six years four months and twenty two days old. Thus, the relevant provisions of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act and Section 376 of IPC are attracted.
8. Dr. Rashi Rai (P.W.15), Medical Officer and Dr. S.S. Patel (P.W.16) conducted the postmortem and found following injuries on the person of the deceased :-
- 5 -
(i) On external examination of the dead body, she found that there was swelling all over the face of the dead body. Contusion on left cheek 3x3 cm was present.
Also there were abrasion on the face as well as maggots on the eyes, mouth and throat. There was swelling on the abdominal part. There were many abrasions on the abdomen, chest and both the thighs. There were no injuries on the skull and vertebra. The brain and spinal cord were normal.
(ii) On the internal examination of the dead body of the deceased, it was found that the veils, ribs and tenderness were normal. Windpipe was normal. The right and left lungs were pale. Both the cavities of the heart were empty. There was no blood in them. There was swelling in the stomach and gas and undigested food was present in it. There was also inflammation in the large intestine and small intestine. Spleen, kidney, liver, urethra were pale. The uterus was small. It was normal in view of her age. The hymen was ruptured and severe injuries were present in Vagina and Cervix. The injuries were so severe that the passage connecting the vagina and anus was also ruptured and blood was oozing out from the injuries.
(iii) In their opinion, the cause of death of the deceased was hemorrhagic shock which was caused due to those injuries which were of grievous nature.
(iv) Death caused 24 to 48 hours before the postmortem.
- 6 -
9. Dr. Rashi Rai (P.W.15) stated that three slides were prepared viz two vaginal slides, two ML slides, two oral slides, one blood sample and in addition, the clothes of deceased which includes red blue frock were sealed and handed over to Police Constable. The blood sample could be collected after great difficulty in view of the condition of the dead body. The hospital put its own seal. Thereafter, Dr. Rashi Rai (P.W.15) received certain queries from the SDO, Police Station Tendukhera, District Narsinghpur by his letter dated 17.12.2019. Six queries were made in the said letter. Dr. Rashi Rai submitted a query report (Ex.P/35). Dr. S.S. Patel (P.W.16) also received similar query and opined in almost similar way.
10. The Court below after considering the statement of the said two doctors and postmortem report opined that the deceased was unlawfully taken by somebody from the lawful custody of her parents and was subjected to serious sexual assault because of which she died. The next question for determination before the Court below was whether the accused persons were guilty for committing the said offence. To determine this, Court considered the circumstantial and scientific evidence and statement of appellant recorded by the Judicial Magistrate First Class under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. (Ex.P/56).
11. The mother of deceased (P.W.1) had suspicion on accused Dinesh @ Munde. Present appellant in his statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. deposed against co-accused person, i.e. Dinesh @ Munde.
12. The Court below considered the statement of appellant recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. and opined in para-44 that accused Anand Kol was arrested on 30.11.2019 at 12:35 P.M. and his statement was recorded before the Judicial Magistrate First Class on the same date at 6:00 P.M. The Court below held that it cannot be said that at the time of recording of said statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. (Ex.P/56),
- 7 -
the appellant was a free person and there was no impact of police on his mind. Thus, the Court below did not give any credence to this statement Ex.P/56. For this purpose, the Court below relied on the judgments of Supreme Court reported in AIR 1952 SC 159 (Kashmira Singh Vs. State of M.P.), AIR 1964 SC 1184 (Haricharan Kurmi and another Vs. State of Bihar) and 2018 SCC OnLine SC 757 (Surinder Kumar Khanna Vs. Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence).
13. Apart from this, the DNA report was considered by the Court below and since the report does not give any finding against accused Dinesh @ Munde, the Court below opined that there is no evidence whatsoever to hold Dinesh @ Munde as guilty.
14. The Court below then considered the role of appellant allegedly played in the commission of crime. As per the memorandum of appellant, a bulb was recovered from the house of the deceased. As per prosecution story, the bulb was taken out from the house of deceased by the appellant on the date of incident so that in complete darkness he can safely kidnap the deceased. A Grey jacket, Black wrapper, one Yellow shirt, one Blue full pant, one jeans pant and one underwear of appellant were recovered. In the underwear, there existed a mark i.e. 3485 and at the place of urination there was a blood stain. These materials were sealed through Ex.P/22. Vineet Sudele (P.W.7) became the witness. The signatures of appellant were also obtained on the packet of materials and the same were sent for chemical examination.
15. The blood sample of appellant was taken by identification form Ex.P/15 on 30.11.2019 in District Hospital, Narsinghpur. The sample was sealed and handed-over to Police Constable Ramraj (No.565). The aforesaid seized materials and the materials recovered from the deceased were sent for DNA Examination to Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) Sagar on 26.11.2019 through Ex.P/48. The same were received in the
- 8 -
FSL, Sagar on 27.11.2019. Similarly, the preserved nail cuttings of deceased and three hairs found on her right palm were also sent for examination through Ex.P/47 on 26.11.2019 which were received by FSL, Sagar on 29.11.2019. The Scientific Officer Dr. Kamlesh Katholiya (P.W.33) entered the witness box and proved DNA finger print report dated 27.01.2020 (Ex.P/55).
16. The Court below has reproduced the relevant portion of the DNA report in the impugned judgment. On the basis of scientific evidence namely DNA report, the Court below opined that the appellant alone is guilty for committing offences alleged against him. The Court below in para-48 of the impugned judgment opined that prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt against the appellant. Thereafter, the Court considered the nature and gravity of crime and held that the prosecution has satisfactorily established that appellant has committed offences under Sections 449, 364, 366, 376AB, 376(2)(m) of the IPC, Section 6 read with 5(i) and Section 6 read with 5(r) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 302 of IPC.
17. The Court below heard the parties on the question of quantum of punishment. After considering the relevant factors, the Court below decided to impose capital punishment for committing offence under Section 302 of IPC and POCSO Act. In addition, the appellant was held guilty for committing offence under Sections 366, 364 and 449 of IPC. He was directed to undergo ten years and life imprisonment for aforesaid offences respectively.
SUBMISSION OF LEARNED AMICUS CURIAE:-
18. Shri Imtiyaz Hussain, learned Senior Counsel/Amicus Curiae urged that in his opinion no fault can be found in the DNA report and in the conviction of the appellant. He criticized the impugned judgment to
- 9 -
the extent capital punishment is directed to be imposed by Court below. Learned Senior Counsel handed over a chart which contains 'aggravating circumstances' and 'mitigating circumstances'. He submits that item nos.1 to 7 in 'mitigating circumstances' are the circumstances which were considered by the Court below in the impugned judgment. In addition to that there are certain other 'mitigating circumstances' viz. (8). Accused did not cause murder of the victim but her death was coincidentally caused because of injuries sustained while she was being raped. (9). No previous enmity with the family of the victim. (10). Accused is not a relative of the victim. (11). There is no possibility that the accused would commit similar crime in future. (12). There is no possibility of continued threat to society on the part of the accused and sparing his life will not endanger the community at large. (13). Accused is not going to be proved menace for the society at large. (14). The incident was outcome of the personal lust. (15). Crime was not committed to terrorize or harm a particular or larger section of society. (16). No weapon was used at the time of incident. He placed reliance on judgments of Supreme Court in Viran Gyanlal Rajput vs. State of Maharashtra (2019) 2 SCC 311, Dileep Bankar vs. State of M.P. (2021) 1 SCC 718, Arvind Singh vs. State of Maharashtra (2021) 11 SCC 1, Shatrughna Baban Meshram vs. State of Maharashtra (2021) 1 SCC 596 & the judgment of this Court in In Re Ramnath Kewat dated 29.7.2022 (CRRFC No.04/2019) and urged that capital punishment deserves to be interfered with and same needs to be modified suitably.
SUBMISSIONS OF APPELLANT'S COUNSEL :-
19. Shri Abhay Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the findings of court below is based on the blood, nail and hair samples allegedly collected from the person of deceased and the appellant. In the manner the nails were collected, preserved and sent for chemical
- 10 -
examination, it creates serious doubt about the correctness of procedure. To elaborate, it is pointed out that Mukesh Sen, (PW-5) stated that the body of deceased was found in his agricultural form. The nails of the deceased were cut by Police and not by anybody else. The seal were put on the sealed envelope at the place of incident. Om Prakash Sharma, (PW-32), the I.O. on the contrary stated that nails of the deceased were cut by her father. The I.O. deposed that some filthy black material was there in the nails of the deceased so cut. The I.O. further admitted that nails were cut by a person without wearing any gloves. Thus, cutting of nails itself is doubtful. In the manner, the nails were cut without wearing gloves, there was every possibly of contamination of this sample. The expert witness, Dr. Kamlesh Katholiya, (PW-33) has admitted this fact.
20. Doubting the procedure of seizure, it is urged that as per deposition of Manoj Patel, (PW-14), the seizure had taken place from a Government land, whereas the father of deceased (PW-9) stated that he put his signature on the seizure at the scene of crime. Thus, there is a variation in the statement of prosecution witnesses.
21. Amit Rawat, (PW-10) deposed that a black jacket was seized whereas I.O. deposed that a dirty/cloudy ('matmaila') jacket was seized.
22. The statement of Vivek Kourav, (PW-12), who was a Patwari is referred to show that he has not mentioned the exact time of preparation of site map, Khasra Panchshala was not produced before the court below. The dead body was allegedly found in Kh. No. 154/2. As per statement of this witness, there were other houses nearby but no independent witness/ neighbour was examined by the prosecution.
23. The statement of Dr. Rashi Rai, (PW-15) is relied upon to contend that a red blue frock was recovered. Her deposition and the report do not throw any light about any sexual assault. For the same purpose, statement
- 11 -
of Dr. S.S. Patel, M.O. (PW-16) is also referred to by learned counsel for the appellant.
24. During the course of argument, Shri Abhay Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant further submits that Om Prakash Sharma (PW-32), admitted that on various occasions about his movement in or out the Police Station, necessary information is not recorded in the relevant book/Rojnamcha. In his deposition, he stated that colour of frock was red. Thus, recovery of frock itself becomes doubtful.
25. The next attack is on the collection of blood sample. For this purpose, statement of G.C. Chourasiya, M.O. (PW-30) is referred alongwith statement of Smt. Rekha Patel, Medical Officer, (PW-13), it is urged that on the one hand, the Medical Officer deposed that he took the blood sample and on the other hand, he stated that the exercise of taking the blood sample is the job of Technicians. He did not remember as to which Ward Boy/Technician had taken the blood sample. In view of variation in the statement of G.C. Chourasiya, M.O. (PW-30) and the statement of Smt. Rekha Patel, (PW-13), the collection of blood from the appellant appears to be doubtful and for this reason DNA result cannot be sole reason for convicting the appellant.
26. The collection of blood sample is called in question on yet another ground. By placing reliance on the statement of Dr. Kamlesh Katholiya, (PW-33), it is submitted that after considerable long time after the death, the blood sample can be collected only from the heart of the dead body, whereas Dr. Rashi Rai, (PW-15) states that blood was recovered from the pleural and abdominal cavity. The appellant, in his answer to question no. 75 asked under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. categorically denied that any blood sample was ever taken from him. In question no. 90 and 138 also he stated that no sample was collected from him and the story of prosecution is false.
- 12 -
27. Shri Abhay Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant initially raised a ground by taking assistance from Section 7 of Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 and contended that as per the said statutory mandate, the investigation could have been conducted only by a competent authority at the level of SDOP. The said officer did not commence the investigation in the instant case and infact received the case diary only on 1.12.2019, when investigation was at the stage of almost completion. However, considering the fact that appellant was not convicted for committing the offence under the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act coupled with the fact that the Supreme Court in (2020) 2 SCC 577 (State of M.P. Vs. Babbu Rathore and another) opined that the said flaw will not vitiate the trial under the provisions of IPC, abandoned his aforesaid argument. Thus, in the findings portion also, we will not deal with this abandoned argument of learned counsel for the appellant.
28. The statement of Ramraj Verma (PW-22) was pointed out to show that in the Government record the blood sample of the appellant is shown as Ex.P-39. The mother of the deceased deposed that blood sample was taken in the hospital. Thus, the purity of collection process of blood sample, its custody and sending the same to FSL is not beyond shadow of doubt.
29. Lastly, Shri Abhay Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant by placing reliance on a recent judgment of this Court in CR Reference No. 4/2019, (Ramnath Kewat Vs. State of M.P.) urged that the imposition of capital punishment was totally uncalled for and unwarranted. He also placed reliance on the mitigating circumstances. It was argued that appellant did not have any intention or motive to murder the deceased. During the course of rape, she suffered severe injuries because of which she died. In this backdrop, offence under Section 302 of IPC is not made
- 13 -
out. Heavy reliance is placed on 2020 (1) JLJ 220 (In reference Vs. Ankur Nitesh) and I.L.R.[2014] M.P., 2441 (In reference vs. Arvind Alias Chhotu Thakur).
SUBMISSIONS OF GOVERNMENT'S COUNSEL :-
30. Shri Yash Soni, learned Government Advocate urged that there is no flaw in the entire procedure of collection, handling, storage and examination of blood and other samples. It is submitted that the IO in his doc statement made it clear that identification form Ex.P/15 was duly prepared which contains his signatures from 'M to M'. Constable No.565 Ramraj Verma (P.W.22) was deputed for the purpose of collection of blood sample of appellant. In the presence of Ramraj, the Medical Officer preserved the blood sample and handed-over to him. The same was sealed in the presence of Head Constable No.141 Aditya Sharma and Constable No.390 Abhishek Gontiya. Ramraj, in turn, handed-over the said sealed sample of blood to Police Station In-charge. The blood sample was taken on 30.11.2019 and it was sent for examination to FSL on 02.12.2019. In between, there was only one day. Thus, there is no inordinate delay in sending the blood sample to FSL.
31. Dr. G.C. Chourasiya, P.W.30's statement is relied upon to show that the blood sample of appellant was duly counter signed by the Medical Officer. He certified the photo of appellant affixed on the form. In addition, he deposed that the seal of Medical Officer of the hospital was affixed on the sealed sample.
32. Dr. Kamlesh Katholiya, Scientific Expert of FSL (P.W.33) was a highly educated person having degree of M.Sc and Ph.D. He has undergone necessary training and passed the relevant courses to undertake the exercise of DNA examination. This doctor candidly deposed that he obtained Ex.P/15 (Identification Form and blood
- 14 -
samples) in intact position. No amount of cross-examination could cause any dent on his statement. Moreso, when he compared the intact seal with the sample of seal and clearly deposed regarding safety of the sealed packet containing blood sample.
33. Similarly, the seizure of clothes of victim was supported by Mukesh Sen (P.W.5), the person in whose agricultural field the body of victim was found.
34. By placing reliance on the statement of Mukesh Sen (P.W.5) and Purushottam (P.W.6) it is urged that recovery of clothes of victim and nail cuttings and hairs from her palm were duly established by these witnesses. Their statements could not be demolished.
35. The statement of Vineet Sudele (P.W.7) and Amit Rawat (P.W.10) were referred to show seizure of clothes of appellant and also the bulb which was allegedly removed from the house of victim.
36. Shri Yash Soni, learned Government Advocate submits that no doubt, there exists little contradiction in the statement of Mukesh Sen (P.W.5), Purushottam (P.W.6) and statement of I.O. (P.W.33) on the fact as to who had actually cut the nails of the victim. The I.O. deposed that victim's father cut the nails and samples of the same were preserved whereas Mukesh Sen (P.W.5) and Purushottam (P.W.6) deposed that it was police/I.O. who had undertaken the aforesaid exercise. The learned Government Advocate submits that this contradiction shown by the appellant counsel is a minor contradiction and is liable to be ignored in the light of judgment of Supreme Court reported in State of Rajasthan v. Kishore AIR 1996 SC 3035; Shyamal Ghosh v. State of West Bengal (2012) 7 SCC 646; Mritunjoy Biswas v. Pranab alias Kuti Biswas and another (2013) 12 SCC 796 and S. Govindaraju v. State of Karnataka, (2013) 15 SCC 315.
- 15 -
37. Heavy reliance is placed on the DNA report to show that it was conclusively proved that it was the appellant who had committed the rape on the victim. Dr. Kamlesh Katholiya's statement was read over for yet another purpose. It was canvassed that he specifically deposed that blood sample of victim showed that it was not disintegrated. Apart from this, the incident had taken place in the intervening night of 22-23.11.2019. The body of victim was found on 24.11.2019 at 15:20 O'Clock and blood sample from the body of deceased was taken at around 10:00 A.M. on 25.11.2019. Thus, blood sample was taken within 48 hours from the time of death. Thus, it cannot be said that collection of blood sample was impossible or improbable.
38. Shri Yash Soni, learned Government Advocate placed reliance on certain judgments to show that the DNA report can become basis for conviction in a case of this nature. Lastly, he submits that in the teeth of Section 53A of Cr.P.C., the ASI was competent to request the doctor for taking the blood sample of the appellant. In turn, the blood sample was taken. The entire procedure is transparent and far from any flaw. Hence, neither trial nor judgment is vitiated.
39. So far question of sentence is concerned, learned Government Advocate placed reliance on the judgment of Supreme Court in Bachan Singh Vs. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 684 and Machhi Singh Vs. State of Punjab (1983) 3 SCC 470 and urged that in the manner the appellant had taken the victim from the lawful custody of her parents in the midnight and brutally raped her, it cannot be said that there was no motive and therefore, it cannot be said that offence under Section 302 of IPC is not made out.
FINDINGS :-
- 16 -
40. The prosecution by leading cogent evidence clearly established that on the intervening night between 22 nd and 23rd of November 2019, the deceased, who was sleeping with her family in an open 'Dalan' (courtyard) was taken by somebody from the lawful custody of her parents and her dead body was found on 24th of November 2019 at 15.30 o'clock at village Chaparpatha, Patwari Halka No. 44, Tahsil Tendukheda, district Narsinghpur in Khasra No.154/2.
41. The age of the victim was determined on the basis of Progress Report, Admission Register and statements of her parents. No amount of argument was advanced to assail both the findings aforesaid. We find no reason to disbelieve or disturb the said findings of court below regarding taking away of the deceased from the lawful possession of the parents and regarding her age, which was determined as six years, four months and 22 days by court below.
42. The prosecution prepared the Panchanama of dead body, (Ex.P-5) and site map, (Ex.P-29). The nail cutting of deceased and three small pieces of hair present in the palm of right hand of deceased alongwith vaginal swab slides, anus swab slides and oral swab slides were recovered through Ex.P-19. The same were handed over to Police Constable, Rajesh Rajput, (No. 250) for sending the same to FSL.
43. In absence of any eye witness to the incident, based on suspicion, the blood sample of Dinesh @ Munde Rajak, Bheem Jharia, Ranjeet Thakur and Vijay Thakur were taken on 26 th of November 2019 in the Primary Health Centre, Kareli for the purpose of sending it to DNA examination. On 28th November 2019 at 21.50 o'clock, the Police received information regarding involvement of appellant from an informer and based thereupon, a Panchanama, (Ex.P-41) was prepared. As per memorandum of appellant, a bulb and clothes were recovered,
- 17 -
vide Ex.P-20. In turn, blood sample of present appellant was taken at the district Hospital, Narsinghpur for DNA profile.
44. During the investigation, the caste certificate of the mother of the deceased was gathered which shows that they belonged to 'Gond', a S.T. community. Pertinently, appellant in his statement recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. admitted that age of deceased was six years and she belonged to S.T. community.
45. The Court below opined that on the date of incident, the age of victim was 6 years, 4 months and 22 days. Her date of birth is consistently recorded in Progress Report, (Ex.P-60) and Admission Register, (Ex.P-28) as 1st July 2013.
46. The Court below in the impugned judgment considered the statement of present appellant recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. by the learned JMFC. The Court below on the strength of judgment of Supreme Court in Kashmira Singh, Haricharan Kurmi and Surendra Kumar Khanna (supra) clearly held that on the basis of such statement, the appellant cannot be held guilty. Thereafter, the Court below considered the DNA finger printing report, dated 27th of January 2020, (Ex.P-55). The jacket, wrapper of black colour, a yellow shirt, a blue full paint, a jeans paint and an underwear of appellant were recovered and sealed in a packet, (Ex.P-22). The seizure witnesses, Vinit Sudele and Amit Rawat put their signatures on the sealed packet. In addition, I.O. Om Prakash Sharma, (PW-32) put his signature. The said independent witnesses supported the version of the prosecution about seizure of said materials. Importantly, it is mentioned that in the underwear of appellant at the place earmarked for urination, there was a blood stain.
- 18 -
47. Through identification form, (Ex. P-15), appellant's blood sample was taken and sealed in District Hospital, Narsinghpur and in turn, the Police Constable, Ramraj Verma (PW-22) seized the same.
48. The I.O. Om Prakash Sharma, (PW-32) deposed that the material collected through (Ex.P-36), clothes and undergarments of the victim (Ex.P-46) were sent for DNA test on 26 th November 2019 which were received in the laboratory on 27 th November 2019, which is evident from (Ex.P-48). The preserved nail cutting, three small piece of hair found on the palm of deceased were seized through Ex. P-19 and were sent to FSL on 26th of November 2019 through Ex.P-47, which were received in the laboratory on 29th of November 2019 through (Ex. P-49). The blood sample and clothes of appellant were sent through draft (Ex.P-44) to FSL on 2nd of December 2019, which were received in the laboratory on the 3rd of December 2019, which is evident on perusal of Ex.P-51. In turn, the DNA finger printing report was prepared on 27 th of January 2020, (Ex.P-
55).
NAILS SAMPLE :-
49. Learned counsel for the appellant rightly highlighted the contradiction in the deposition of Mukesh Sen, (PW-5) and Om Prakash Sharma, (PW-32) to the extent of cutting of nail by a particular person. It was also urged that the person while cutting nails and preserving it in the sealed packet was not wearing gloves. Thus, nails sample was contaminated and this possibility was not overruled by Dr. Kamlesh Katholiya (P.W.33), the expert witness. We are only inclined to observe that a plain reading of DNA report shows that the findings are not confined and based on the source, i.e. nails. On the contrary, the findings are based on clothes of deceased, pieces of hair found in the palm of the deceased also. Thus, even if we ignore the findings based on the sample of nails, the appellant will not be able to wriggle out of the clutches of
- 19 -
other findings. The same shall be the position in relation to the discrepancy relating to colour of the frock.
ENTRY OF MOVEMENT IN ROJNAMCHA :-
50. Learned counsel for the appellant although urged that Investigating Officer, Om Prakash Sharma, (PW-32) admitted that during his movement in or outside the Police Station, on certain occasions, he did not enter the information in the Rojnamcha, the effect of said irregularity is not established with necessary clarity. This is trite that every procedural flaw in investigation will not result into miscarriage of justice and based on every trivial flaw, mechanically it cannot be declared that the investigation stands vitiated.
COLLECTION OF BLOOD SAMPLE :-
51. Shri Abhay Gupta, learned counsel placed reliance on Ex.P/51 (Identification Form) and urged that the name of appellant is wrongly recorded in the first column of second page of the said form. A plain reading of the form and the said entry shows that argument is devoid of any substance. In the said form, for the purpose of name, a different entry is made. The entry on which reliance is placed reads as under :-
"The blood sample from superficial nerve was collected by me in the presence of following witnesses"
There is no manner of doubt that this entry has nothing to do with the name of the person whose blood was collected.
52. The contradiction in collection of blood sample of appellant was yet another issue raised by the appellant. The discrepancy shown is to the extent that G.C. Chourasiya, M.O. (PW-30) in his initial part of deposition stated that he had taken the blood sample of the appellant
- 20 -
whereas in the later portion stated that collection of blood sample is the function of the technician.
53. The blood sample of appellant was taken in the presence of two witnesses who have proved the collection of said blood sample from the appellant. No amount of cross examination could cause a scratch on the correctness of their statements. Apart from this, the blood sample was sealed in the presence of Smt. Rekha Patel, Medical Officer, (PW-13). All these seizure witnesses unequivocally established the collection of blood sample from the appellant. Thus, minor discrepancy pointed out by learned counsel for the appellant pales into insignificance.
54. The blood sample can be collected from a dead body after 48 hours only from the heart whereas in the instant case said blood sample was recovered from different cavities was another limb of argument. Learned Government Counsel in his argument made it clear that the blood sample from the dead body of victim was indeed taken within 48 hours from the approximate time of death. Apart from this, there is no clinching material to show that said blood sample could not have been collected from pleural and abdominal cavity. Dr. Rashi Rai, (PW-15) candidly deposed that blood samples were recovered from the said cavities. She was not put to cross- examination on this aspect. Thus, this argument also deserves to be rejected.
DNA TEST REPORT AND CONVICTION :-
55. The relevant portion of DNA report reads thus :-
"14- izdj.k esa izkIr izn'kksZ ls izkIr vkWVkslksey STR DNA Profile dk fooj.k esjs }kjk izLrqr fjiksVZ rkfydk Øzekad&02 esa gSA rkfydk Øzekad&02 fooj.k fuEukuqlkj gS& 01- ?kVukLFky ls tIr e`frdk dh vaMjfo;j ,oa ySxh izn'kZ ,Q ¼Mh@6650½ ls iq:"k fefJr Autosomal STR DNA Profile izkIr gqbZA
- 21 -
02- ?kVukLFky ls TkIr e`frdk dh vaMjfo;j ,oa ySxh izn'kZ ,Q ¼Mh@6650½ ls izkIr iq:"k fefJr Autosomal STR DNA Profile ds izR;sd tsusfVd ekdZj ij ik, x, ,yhYl esa vkjksih vkuan dksy ds L=ksr jDr uewuk izn'kZ ,e ¼bZ@1766½ ls izkIr Autosomal STR DNA Profile ds izR;sd tsusfVd ekdZj ij ik, x, ,yhy tksMs Hkh mifLFkr gSaA 03- e`frdk ls tIr uk[kwu dfVax izn'kZ ds ¼bZ@1563½ ,oaa e`frdk ds nkfgus gkFk esa Qals cky izn'kZ ,y dh ¼bZ@1564½ ls iq:"k Autosomal STR DNA Profile izkIr gqbZA 04- e`frdk ls tIr uk[kwu dfVax izn'kZ ds ¼bZ@1563½ ,oa e`frdk ds nkfgus gkFk esa Qals cky izn'kZ ,y dh ¼bZ@1564½ ls iq:"k Autosomal STR DNA Profile ds izR;sd tsusfVd ekdZj ij ik, x, ,yhy tksMs ,oa vkjksih vkuan dksy ds L=ksr jDr uewuk izn'kZ ,e ¼bZ@1766½ ls izkIr Autosomal STR DNA Profile ds izR;sd tsusfVd ekdZj ij ik, x, ,yhy tksMs ,d leku gSaA
16. vfHker %& 01- e`frdk ds L=ksr ,uy Lokc LykbZM ¼izn'kZ lh½] oStkbuy Lokc LykbM ¼izn'kZ Mh½ ,oa ?kVukLFky ls tIr e`frdk dh vaMjfo;j ,oa ySxh ¼izn'kZ ,Q½ ls izkIr Y Chromosome STR DNA Prolile, vkjksih vkuan dksy ds L=ksr ¼izn'kZ ,e½ ls izkIr Y Chromosome STR DNA Prolile ds leku gSA 02- ?kVuk LFky ls TkIr e`frdk dh ySxh o vaMjfo;j ¼izn'kZ ,Q½ ls izkIr iq:"k fefJr Autosomal STR DNA Profile esa vkjksih vkuan dksy ds L=ksr ¼izn'kZ ,e½ ls izkIr Autosomal STR DNA Profile Hkh mifLFkr gSA 03- e`frdk ls tIr uk[kwu dh dfVax ¼izn'kZ ds½ ls izkIr iqq:"k Autosomal STR DNA Profile, vkjksih vkuan dksy ds L=ksr ¼izn'kZ ,e½ dh gSA 04- e`frdk ds nkfgus gkFk esa Qals cky ¼izn'kZ ,y½ ls izkIr iq:"k Autosomal STR DNA Profile, vkjksih vkuan dksy ds L=ksr ¼izn'kZ ,e½ dh gSA"
[Emphasis Supplied]
56. Dr. Kamlesh Katholiya (P.W.33) in his court statement in sufficient details mentioned the procedure of receiving and examining the samples of victim and the appellant. The examination-in-chief shows that
- 22 -
he possess requisite qualification to conduct a DNA test. Dr. Katholiya was not put to any question regarding flaw in the methodology and procedure adopted for the DNA profiling. Thus, his statement is worthy of credence. The Apex Court in Santosh Kumar Singh vs. State (2010) 9 SCC 747 held that :
68. It is significant that not a single question was put to PW Dr. Lalji Singh as to the accuracy of the methodology or the procedure followed for the DNA profiling. The trial court has referred to a large number of textbooks and has given adverse findings on the accuracy of the tests carried out in the present case. We are unable to accept these conclusions as the court has substituted its own opinion ignoring the complexity of the issue on a highly technical subject, more particularly as the questions raised by the court had not been put to the expert witnesses. In Bhagwan Das v. State of Rajasthan [AIR 1957 SC 589 : 1957 Cri LJ 889] it has been held that it would be a dangerous doctrine to lay down that the report of an expert witness could be brushed aside by making reference to some text on that subject without such text being put to the expert.
[Emphasis Supplied]
57. In the same same judgment it was further held that :
65. We now come to the circumstance with regard to the comparison of the semen stains with the blood taken from the appellant. The trial court had found against the prosecution on this aspect. In this connection, we must emphasise that the court cannot substitute its own opinion for that of an expert, more particularly in a science such as DNA profiling which is a recent development.
[Emphasis Supplied]
58. In the view of ratio decidendi of Santosh Kumar Singh (supra), the statement of Dr. Katholiya is trustworthy and no flaw could be established in the impugned judgment in which the Court below based its finding on the expert report and DNA test result and recorded conviction.
- 23 -
59. In our considered opinion, the Court below has rightly relied upon the DNA report which is treated to be scientifically accurate and an exact science as held by the Supreme Court in Kamti Devi (Smt.)vs. Poshi Ram (2001) 5 SCC 311.
DEATH SENTENCE :-
60. An author interestingly observed that when a man kills, he breaks the law. When the State punishes by death, it upholds the law. The author further stated that the man murders, the State executes, one deals death, other awards it, murder extinguishes life, the death penalty annuls the right to stay alive.
61. The conundrum of imposition of capital punishment was best explained with his usual eloquence which became idiomatic signature of Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer. In two important judgments viz. Shiv Mohan Singh Vs. State (Delhi Admn.) reported in (1977) 2 SCC 238 and Joseph Peter vs. State of Goa, Daman and Diu reported in (1977) 3 SCC 280 he expressed his opinion about death sentence. The relevant paragraphs of Shiv Mohan Singh (supra) reads thus :-
"11. This prolegomenon to the principles of capital sentence is our alibi for a brief divagation into the basics of infliction of death as a weapon of extinction society uses against its terribly deviant members as beyond deterrence." Is the death penalty a purposeful punitive strategy or legitimate legal weapon, viewed against the advanced penological goals of reformation, deterrence and social defence? Why is death terrifying and what are the objects of punishment served by its infliction ?"
12. The literature on doing justice at the sentencing stage is profound and proliferating and penological controversy on death penalty has led to a Great Divide among sociologists, jurists and spiritualists. To go eggregiously wrong on punishment is to commit the "crime" of sentence and, naturally since taking the life
- 24 -
of the prisoner neither prevents him nor reforms him (for he is no more), theories supporting capital punishment prove self-defeating. (....) the irreversible step of extinguishing the offender's life leaves society with no opportunity to retrieve him if the conviction and punishment be found later to be founded on flawsome evidence or the sentence is discovered to be induced by some phoney aggravation, except the poor consolation of posthumous rehabilitation as has been done in a few other countries for which there is no procedure in our system. Maybe, these are campaign points of abolitionists against capital sentence.
13. Envisioned from another fundamentally different angle, is the dread of death penalty a deterrant ? Socrates would not recant, Jesus would not plead, St Joan would not deny -- with the cup of poison, bleeding crucifixion and burning stakes staring them in the face as punishment. Why, Higher Truth, acting through its inspired agents, taunts human law; for, then the body gives little purchase over the soul, as Gandhiji demonstrated by defiance of British-Indian "justice". And, more dramatically yet dimly, psychic, electronic and medical explorations, scientifically conducted, are reportedly revealing through fascinating flashes of research and recording and extraordinary but tested investigations into rebirth, that death is only discarnation, not utter dissolution, that after "death" we survive and act in a demonstrable, subtle dimension of existence. No longer is this thesis projected as faith but sought to be proved as fact. If, in the not distant future, the greatest of allman's fears -- fear of death -- is dispelled by the finding of noetic science proving that you live after "death" and can communicate with the "living", that the confusion between discarnation and death can be scientifically explored and cleared, a revolution in the penological programmes of society would have dawned.
14. The basic issue "What is death?", may engage us psycho-crimino-logically, although a wee-bit digressively for a moment, to assess the social impact
- 25 -
of the death penalty. By and large, humankind holds fast to the belief that death is a total extinction of dear life and views its arrival through the executioner's rope or electric chair or firing squad with awesome horror. With poetic pragmatism, Shakespeare expressed this common feeling when he referred, in the context of death, to "that undiscovered country from whose bourn no traveller returns". There are others, however -- and among them are ancient seers, modem divines and several psychic researchers in institutes who regard as super-sensory. Reality or scientific verity that there is life after life, that the phenomenon of death may even have a liberating effect, that the grosser existence is in corporeal life and the subtler in the incorporeal state and life-death- life is a continuum."
(Emphasis Supplied)
62. The relevant paragraph of Joseph Peter (supra) reads as under :-
"1. A death sentence, with all its dreadful scenario of swinging desperately out of the last breath of mortal life, is an excruciating hour for the Judges called upon to lend signature to this macabre stroke of the executioner's rope. Even so, Judges must enforce the laws, whatever they be, and decide according to the best of their lights; but the laws, are not always just, and the lights are not always luminous. Nor, again, are judicial methods always adequate to secure justice. We are bound by the Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code, by the very oath of our office."
(Emphasis Supplied)
63. On the same subject in the case of Swamy Shraddananda (2) vs. State of Karnataka, (2008) 13 SCC 767 Justice Aftab Alam expressed his view as under :-
"51. The truth of the matter is that the question of death penalty is not free from the subjective element and the confirmation of death sentence or its communication by the Supreme Court depends a good deal on the personal predilection of the Judges constituting the Bench."
(Emphasis Supplied)
- 26 -
64. The aforesaid legal journey shows that element of subjectivity can take place while deciding the question of quantum of punishment. To eradicate it, various tests such as R - R test, Crime Test and balance sheet about the aggravating and mitigating circumstances were introduced. To eschew the element of subjectivity in the matter of imposition of punishment, it is necessary to apply the said tests with accuracy and precision. The capital punishment cannot be imposed mechanically. This conundrum needs to be addressed with utmost care and caution.
BALANCE SHEET AND SENTENCE :-
65. A balance sheet of 'Aggravating' and 'Mitigating' circumstances in the instant case are as under :-
Aggravating Circumstances Mitigating Circumstances As per trial court: Judgment As per trial court : Judgment Para 77 : Para-78 :
1. Victim of offence is a six years 1. No previous criminal record.
helpless girl. 2. Age of the accused is 26 years.
2. Injuries on the person of the victim 3. Accused having a daughter aged 1½ (on her private parts and body) year and wife who would be which does cause concern to the deprived of their bread-earner. society at large. 4. Accused belonging to BPL section of
3. Six years old victim done to death society.
brutally without any provocation. 5. Case is based on circumstantial
4. Offence committed after due evidence.
deliberation. 6. Residual Doubt Theory applied to the
5. The accused had no repentance case.
after commission of offence and 7. There is no evidence to show that the he tried to implicate the co- accused would in future commit accused falsely by getting any offence creating alarm of the recorded statement under Section society or that there is no 164 Cr.P.C. (Para-87 of possibility of his reformation or judgment). rehabilitation.
Additional Mitigating Circumstances :
- 27 -
(Added by learned amicus curiae)
8. Accused did not cause murder of the victim but her death was co-
incidentally caused because of injuries sustained while she was raped.
9. No previous enmity with the family of the victim.
10. Accused is not a relative of the victim.
11. There is no possibility that the accused would commit similar crime in future.
12. There is no possibility of continued threat to society on the part of the accused and sparing his life will not endanger the community at large.
13. Accused is not going to prove menace for the society at large.
14. The incident was outcome of the personal lust.
15. Crime was not committed to terrorize or harm a particular or larger section of society.
16. No weapon was used at the time of incident.
17. No special reasons exist to impose capital punishment.
66. In Deepak @ Nanhu Kirar vs. State of M.P. (Cr.A. No.7544/2019), this Court considered the celebrated judgment of Apex Court in Bachan Singh and Machhi Singh (supra) and opined that :-
"62. The sentencing policy was taken note of by Apex Court in large number of cases. In the case of Bachan Singh Vs. State of Punjab, 1980 (2) SCC 684, it was held that the normal rule is that the offence of murder shall be punished with the sentence of life imprisonment. The Court can depart from that rule and
- 28 -
impose the sentence of death only when there are special reason. If the offence is of an exceptionally depraved and heinous character and constitute on account of its design and the manner of its execution, a source of grave danger to the society at large, the Court may impose death sentence. While interpreting Section 354 of Cr.P.C., the Apex Court in Machhi Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, 1983 (3) SCC 470 opined that a balance sheet of aggravating and mitigating circumstance has to be drawn up and in doing so, the mitigating circumstance has to be accorded full weightage and a just balance has to be struck between the aggravating and mitigating circumstances. The question which needs to be posed is whether the crime is such that there is no alternative but to impose death sentence even after according maximum weightage to the mitigating circumstance.
63. In a recent judgment, 2018 SCC Online 2570 (Channulal Verma Vs. State of Chhattisgarh), the Apex Court took note of its previous judgments on sentencing policy and opined that the test discussed in Shankar Kishanrao Khade (supra) needs to be applied while awarding the death sentence. The test for death sentence are (crime test, criminal test and R-R test) and not the "balance test". To award death sentence, the 'crime test' has to be fully satisfied i.e. 100% and 'criminal test' 0% i.e. no mitigating circumstance favouring the accused. It was poignantly held that if there is any circumstance favouring the accused like young age of accused, 'criminal test' may favour the accused to avoid the capital punishment."
(Emphasis Supplied)
67. In this backdrop, the challenging quagmire is whether the capital punishment is disproportionate or not. In series of judgments, it was ruled that the death sentence can be imposed in absence of any other alternative, otherwise, imposition of life imprisonment is the rule. In the present case, there exists few mitigating circumstances in favour of the appellant. As per the judgment of Supreme Court in Channulal Verma
- 29 -
(supra), even if one circumstance favour the accused, the imposition of capital punishment is not justifiable.
68. Learned Amicus Curiae also referred the judgment of Apex Court in Dilip Bankar (supra) where the victim was a minor girl, aged about 5 years. The body of victim was found and later on it was found that she was subjected to rape. The capital sentence was reduced by the Apex Court in the said case. In the case of Arvind Singh (supra), the Supreme Court reduced/modified the capital punishment where an innocent boy aged about 8 years was murdered for ransom. The judgment of Supreme Court in Shatrughan Meshram (supra) was pressed into service to show that a two and a half years old girl was subjected to sexual assault by maternal uncle. In the said case rape resulted into her death. The capital punishment was commuted to the sentence of life imprisonment.
SECTION 302 OF THE I.P.C. :-
69. Learned counsel for the appellant urged that the prosecution miserably failed to prove that necessary ingredients for attracting Section 302 of the I.P.C. were present in the instant case. It was strenuously argued that even assuming that appellant has brutally raped the victim, there was no intention or motive to kill the victim. The appellant did not have any knowledge that the said incident will result into her death. We find substantial force in his argument in view of the judgment of Division Bench of this Court in the case of In Reference vs. Arvind Alias Chhotu Thakur I.L.R [2014] M.P. 2441, the relevant portion of the same is reproduced hereunder :-
"In the present case, it would be apparent that it was not the intention of the appellant to kill the deceased prosecutrix. He is not found guilty of offence under Section 302 of I.P.C. Similarly if the appellant would have been found guilty of offence under Sections 376(1) or (2) of I.P.C. then, he would have been awarded a sentence of life imprisonment but, the
- 30 -
offence is committed after introduction of provision of Section 376-A of I.P.C. which provides a sentence of life imprisonment up to the natural life or with death. In the present case, when the crime committed by the appellant falls within the purview of Section 376-A of I.P.C. then it is necessary that a severe sentence as directed in the provision of Section 376-A of I.P.C. which is severe than the sentence of offence under Section 376(1) or (2) of I.P.C. should be awarded. However, according to the factual position, the appellant did not kill the deceased intentionally but, while he stopped the prosecutrix from crying or shouting, suffocation was caused and the deceased prosecutrix died. However, rape with a girl of tender age is brutal on its own but, no death sentence is provided for offence under Section 376(1) or (2) of I.P.C. therefore, due to that brutality, no death sentence can be directed. Under such circumstances, it cannot be said that it is a rare of rarest case and therefore, it would be proper not to award the death sentence to the appellant for offence under Section 376-A of I.P.C. It would be proper that he be sentenced for rigorous imprisonment for life which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person's natural life."
(Emphasis Supplied)
70. In the opinion of this Court, the argument of learned counsel for the appellant has substantial force that necessary ingredients for attracting Section 302 of IPC are absent in the present case. Thus, in the absence of establishing any intention of causing death on the part of appellant, the appellant cannot be held guilty for committing murder of the victim. In our opinion, the bodily injuries caused to the victim were very grave in nature and these kinds of bodily injuries caused to the victim were certainly sufficient and likely to cause death. Thus, conviction under Section 302 of IPC deserves to be modified by convicting him under Section 304 Part I of IPC.
71. It is noteworthy that the appellant was also held guilty for committing offence under Section 6 read with Section 5(m) of POCSO
- 31 -
Act. This Court in a separate paragraph dealt with aspect of quantum of sentence. This Court clearly held that imposition of death sentence was not warranted in the peculiar fact situation of this case.
72. At the end, we record our appreciation for the able assistance provided to us by learned Amicus Curiae / Senior Counsel and the other learned counsel appearing for the parties.
CONCLUSION :-
73. In view of foregoing analysis, we are unable to give stamp of approval on the conviction of appellant under Section 302 of IPC. In lieu of conviction under Section 302 of IPC, the appellant shall be treated to be convicted under Section 304 Part I of the IPC and shall be required to undergo sentence for a period of 35 years (without remission).
74. We do not find any infirmity in the impugned judgment wherein conviction of appellant is recorded under Section 366, 364 and 449 of IPC and Section 6 read with 5(m) of the POCSO Act. However, in our opinion, imposition of capital punishment was unwarranted in the factual matrix of the instant case. The said capital punishment is modified by imposing sentence of R.I. of 35 years (without remission).
75. The appeal is partly allowed and reference is answered accordingly.
(SUJOY PAUL) (PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA)
JUDGE JUDGE
PK
PARITOS Digitally signed by PARITOSH KUMAR
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, ou=JUDICIAL, postalCode=482001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=43c946b45c8a66c03b68676e788802a41cc03b5b9567caf9c2c3b981b8cb659 H KUMAR 6, pseudonym=5FDD657FF77E3DB41E52E72D7A39EEED5DBC7BA4, serialNumber=678DC301994B496012A9643D92E6C6335F11A93DA54F2DFB6E44B8B 7A45044FC, cn=PARITOSH KUMAR Date: 2022.09.09 12:33:03 +05'30'