Delhi District Court
8 vs Vinod @ Dantla S/O Sh. Mohan Lal Bahadur on 10 February, 2012
-1-
IN THE COURT OF SH. GURDEEP SINGH
ADDITIONAL SESSION JUDGE-03, OUTER DISTRICT
ROHINI COURTS:DELHI
FIR No. : 447/2007
PS : Bawana
U/s : 302/363/366/376/377/201 IPC
Unique Case ID : 02404R0 658232007
In the matter of
The State
Versus
Vinod @ Dantla s/o Sh. Mohan Lal Bahadur
R/o H. No. C-II/1090, Sec-27
Rohini, Delhi.
...ACCUSED
ORDER ON SENTENCE
10.02.2012
Pr.: Sh. A. K. Srivastava, Ld. Addl. PP for State
Convict Vinod @ Dantla produced in j/c.
Ms. Sadhna Bhatia, Advocate, Amicus Curiae for convict.
Clarification taken. Heard.
It is submitted that convict is person of young age and at the
relevant time he was aged about 20 years at the time of incident. He is
illiterate and unmarried and is having old age mother. He is only person
to support mother. Further, it is submitted, that this case is based on the
circumstantial evidence and therefore keeping in view the facts that guilt
is not established beyond doubt by way of direct evidence and the same
amounts to mitigating circumstance and therefore it does not fall in the
FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 1 of 43
-2-
category of rarest of the rare cases.
On the other hand, Ld. Addl. PP has submitted that in the present
case a young girl aged about 6 and ½ years of age was brutally murdered
after ravishing her and committing carnal intercourse and even thereafter
the brutality of the convict continue and he cut the forearm of the child
and thrown the forearm in the ladies public toilet to distract the course of
investigation and destroy the evidence and submitted that the case falls
under the category of rarest of the rare cases and submitted that death
penalty be awarded and cited Mannan @ Abdul Mannan (Md.) v. State
of Bihar, 2011 III AD (CRI.) (SC) 137.
In this case, the convict was known to the deceased girl aged
about 6 ½ years and her family as he was on visiting terms to their
house. On 14.08.2007, at about 9:45 p.m. she went missing and on the
same day from ladies public toilet cut forearm of child were recovered
which were got identified by the father of girl to be that of her missing
girl and his younger daughter Smriti told her father that Deedi Simran
Ko Dantla Apne Sath Le Gaya Hai. On this, the convict was
apprehended and confessed the crime and got recovered the dead body
with cut off hands from in between the bushes, vacant plot DDA which
was also identified by the complainant. The postmortem was got
conducted upon the dead body of deceased and cut forearm. The doctor
who conducted postmortem proved that the chopped hands i.e. forearms
are that of the dead body. The postmortem further confirmed sexual
intercourse as well as carnal intercourse having been committed with
deceased prior to killing her and found other injuries on parts of the body
FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 2 of 43
-3-
and opined cause of death as combined effect of asphyxia and
haemorrhagic shock consequent upon manual strangulation and liver
injury respectively. The convict also got recovered blood stained weapon
of offence i.e. gandasa/farsa from his house, which was also got
examined by the doctor who opined that the injury no.1 mentioned in the
postmortem report i.e. postmortem dismembering of both upper limbs at
the level of elbow and forearms are possible by this weapon or similar
type of weapon. Vinod @ Dantla was convicted for offences punishable
u/s 363/376/377/302/201 IPC.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in many cases has reiterated that life
imprisonment is the rule and death penalty is the exception to be given
only in the rarest of the rare case. In Lehna V. State of Haryana, 2002
SCC (Cri) 526, it was held that the death penalty can be awarded when:
(1)When the murder is committed in an extremely brutal,
grotesque, diabolical, revolting, or dastardly manner so
as to arouse intense and extreme indignation of the
community.
(2)When the murder is committed for a motive which evinces
total depravity and meanness, e.g., murder by hired
assassin for money or reward, or cold-blooded murder for
gains of a person vis-a-vis whom the murderer is in a
dominating position or in a position of trust, or murder is
committed in the course for betrayal of the motherland.
(3)When murder of a member of a Scheduled Caste or
minority community, etc., is committed not for personal
reasons but in circumstances which arouse social wrath,
or in cases of "bride burning" or "dowry deaths" or
when murder is committed in order to remarry for the
sake of extracting dowry once again or to marry another
woman on account of infatuation.
FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 3 of 43
-4-
(4)When the crime is enormous in proportion. For instance
when multiple murders, say of all or almost all the
members of a family or a large number of persons of a
particular caste, community, or locality, are committed.
(5)When the victim of murder is an innocent child, or a
helpless woman or old or infirm person or a person vis-a-
vis whom the murderer is in a dominating position, or a
public figure generally loved and respected by the
community.
The court before arriving at a decision whether the case falls in
the category of rarest of the rare cases, requires to list aggravating or
mitigating circumstances and prepare balance sheet of the same before
arriving at a decision. The division bench of Hon'ble Delhi High Court
in case titled as State v. Raj Kumar Khandelwal 164 (2009) DLT 713
(DB) observed that for the said purpose circumstances can be listed
under six heads :
i) Circumstances personal to the offender.
ii) Pre-offence conduct of the offender and in particular the
motive.
iii) Contemporaneous conduct of the offender while
committing the offence
iv) Post offence conduct of the offender
v) Role of the victime in commission of the crime.
vi) Nature of evidence.
Hon'ble High Court has also listed illustrations by way of judicial
decision as to what amount to mitigating factors and aggravating factors.
According to the same, the circumstance of the present case can
FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 4 of 43
-5-
be listed as follows :
1. CIRCUMSTANCES PERSONAL TO THE OFFENDER
Sr. MITIGATING FACTORS AGGRAVATING FACTORS
No
i) The convict does not have Anti social or socially
past criminal record abhorrent nature of crime
ii) He was too young at the time The offence is committed in
of commission of offence the circumstance which arouse
social wrath. Offence is of
such a nature so as to shake
the confidence of people.
Abuse of a position of trust.
2. PRE-OFFENCE CONDUCT OF THE OFFENDER AND IN
PARTICULAR THE MOTIVE.
Sr. MITIGATING FACTORS AGGRAVATING
No FACTORS
i) NIL There is significant degree of
planning or premeditation in
the present case wherein a
child about 6 and ½ years of
age was lured by the accused.
3. CONTEMPORANEOUS CONDUCT OF THE OFFENDER
WHILE COMMITTING THE OFFENCE.
Sr. MITIGATING FACTORS AGGRAVATING
No FACTORS
i) NIL Brutal manner of killing - in
an extremely brutal,
grotesque, diabolical,
revolting, or dastardly
FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 5 of 43
-6-
manner so as to arose intense
and extreme indignation of
the community.
Mental or physical suffering
inflicted on the victim before
death.
4. POST OFFENCE CONDUCT OF THE OFFENDER.
Sr. MITIGATING FACTORS AGGRAVATING
No FACTORS
i) NIL Concealment, destruction or
dismemberment of the body.
Lack of remorse.
5. ROLE OF THE VICTIM IN COMMISSION OF THE CRIME.
Sr. MITIGATING FACTORS AGGRAVATING
No FACTORS
i) NIL Victim was vulnerable
because of age, she was aged
about 6 and ½ years.
6. NATURE OF THE EVIDENCE .
Sr. MITIGATING FACTORS AGGRAVATING
No FACTORS
i) Case of circumstantial NIL.
evidence (where conviction
solely resting on
circumstantial evidence,
which contributes to the
uncertainty in the culpability
calculus, must attract
negative attention while
deciding maximum penalty
for murder.)
FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 6 of 43
-7-
Accordingly, in the present case, there are three mitigating factors
which are in favour of the accused/convict i.e. no previous involvement,
his age at the time of commission of offence and that this case is based
on circumstantial evidence whereas following circumstances are
aggravating :
i.) Anti social or socially abhorrent nature of crime
ii.) The offence is committed in the circumstance which arouse
social wrath. Offence is of such a nature so as to shake the
confidence of people.
iii.)There is significant degree of planning or premeditation in the
present case wherein a child about 6 and ½ years of age was
lured by the accused.
iv.)Brutal manner of killing - in an extremely brutal, grotesque,
diabolical, revolting, or dastardly manner so as to arose intense
and extreme indignation of the community.
v.) Concealment, destruction or dismemberment of the body
vi.)Lack of remorse.
vii.)Victim was vulnerable because of age of 6 and ½ years.
Therefore, the aggravating circumstances far outweigh the
mitigating circumstances.
In the cited judgment of Mannan @ Abdul Mannan (supra),
hon'ble Supreme Court upheld the death penalty. In the said case, hon'ble
Supreme Court observed as under :
17.It is trite that death sentence can be inflicted only in
a case which comes within the category of rarest of
the rare cases but there is no hard and fast rule and
the parameter to decide this vexed issue. This Court
FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 7 of 43
-8-
had the occasion to consider the cases which can be
termed as rarest of the rare cases and although
certain comprehensive guidelines have been laid to
adjudge this issue but no hard and fast formula of
universal application has been laid down in this
regard. Crimes are committed in so different and
distinct circumstances that it is impossible to lay
down comprehensive guidelines to decide this issue.
Nevertheless it is widely accepted that in deciding
this question the number of persons killed is not
decisive. Further crime being brutal and heinous
itself do not turn the scale towards the death
sentence. When the crime is committed in an
extremely brutal, grotesque, diabolical, revolting or
dastardly manners so as to arouse intense and
extreme indignation of the community and when
collective conscience of the community is petrified,
one has to lean towards the death sentence. But this
is not the end. If these factors are present the court
has to see as to whether the accused is a menace to
the society and continue to be so, threatening its
peaceful and harmonious co-existence. The court
has to further enquire and believe that the accused
condemned cannot be reformed or rehabilitated and
shall continue with the criminal acts. In this way a
balance-sheet is to be prepared while considering
the imposition of penalty of death of aggravating
and mitigating circumstances and just balance is to
be struck. So long the death sentence is provided in
the statute and when collective conscience of the
community is petrified, it is expected that the holders
of judicial power do not stammer, de hors their
personal opinion and inflict death penalty. These are
the broad guidelines with this Court had led for
imposition of the death penalty.
In the said case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court found following
circumstance against convict. The appellant was a matured man aged
FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 8 of 43
-9-
about 43 years and held a position of trust and misused the same in
calculated and preplanned manner. He sent the girl aged about 7 years to
buy betel and few minutes thereafter in order to execute his diabolical
and grotesque desire proceeded towards the shop where she was held.
The girl was aged about 7 years of thin built and 4 feet of height and
such a child was incapable of arousing lust in normal situation. As per
the postmortem report shows various injuries on the face, nails and body
of the child. Injuries showed the gruesome manner in which she was
subjected to rape. The victim of crime was an innocent child who did not
provide even an excuse, much less a provocation for murder. Such
cruelty towards a young child was appalling. The appellant had stooped
(sic) so low as to unleash his monstrous self on the innocent; helpless
and defenceless child. The act invited extreme indignation of the
community and shocked the collective conscience of the society."
In the said case appellant was seen with the child and thereafter
dead body was recovered on his confessional statement, she was having
injury on her private part, her nails were munched and bruises over her
body. The said case was also based on circumstantial evidence in which
the child was raped and murdered and thereafter body was concealed.
The child was having injury on all over her parts. The facts of the said
case are very close to the present case. The case in hand is based on
circumstantial evidence and the child was of the same age, convict was
known to the child being on visiting terms, and he was in a position of
trust and betrayed the trust. He not only raped her but also committed
carnal intercourse. Postmortem report reveals following injury.
i. One laceration 2.5 cm x 0.75 cm over upper middle part of
FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 9 of 43
-10-
forehead, and
ii. multiple scratches marks outwards overlaping to each other
with intervening diffuse bruising in total area 5x3 cms vertical
over left side neck about 4.5 cms below left ear lobule,
iii. grazing reddish brown in colour in area 9x6 cms vertical over
middle lower back of chest,
iv. massive bruising over vaginal orifice and
v. massive bruising at anal sphincter.
Apart from the vaginal and anal orifice, there were several injuries
on other parts of the body. The convict in this case has caused injuries
before her death in gruesome manner inflicting extreme pain to her
which even resulted injury to liver and also cut forearms of the deceased
after killing her and thrown/kept the same in the ladies public toilet to
distract the course of investigation and destroy the evidence. Therefore
the only circumstance which is distinct from the cited case is that the
accused in the present case is of young age. However, in the manner the
offence has been committed with a young child and thereafter after
dismembering the forearm thrown/kept the same in ladies toilet shows
the psyche of the convict that he is deep planner and brutal executor and
the mitigating circumstance of young age have been outweighed by the
convict by cutting the forearm of the child after killing her and throwing
the same in ladies public toilet which is more brutal than the cited case
and had aroused the public outcry and has invited extreme indignation of
the community and shocked the collective conscience of the society.
Accordingly there is no shadow of doubt that the offence has been
FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 10 of 43
-11-
committed in an extremely brutal, grotesque, diabolical, revolting or
dastardly manner that invited extreme indignation of the community and
shocked the collective conscience of the society. The convict is menace
to the society. The facts of the cited judgment squarely applies to the
facts of the present case in which hon'ble Apex Court upheld the
death penalty.
In the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the present case falls
within the category of rarest of the rare cases, therefore convict Vinod @
Dantla is sentenced to death for offence punishable u/s 302 IPC and fine
of Rs.50,000/-. Accordingly he be hanged by the neck till he is dead.
The convict is further sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment
(RI) for three (3) years and fine of Rs.5,000/- for offence punishable u/s
363 IPC. In default of payment of fine, the convict is further sentence to
undergo simple imprisonment (SI) for a period of three (3)months.
The convict is further sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment
(RI) for life and fine of Rs.10,000/- for offence punishable u/s 376 IPC.
In default of payment of fine, the convict is further sentence to undergo
simple imprisonment (SI) for a period of six (6) months.
The convict is further sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment
(RI) for a period of five (5) years and fine of Rs.10,000/- for offence
punishable u/s 377 IPC. In default of payment of fine, the convict is
further sentence to undergo simple imprisonment (SI) for a period of
six (6) months.
The convict is further sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment
FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 11 of 43
-12-
(RI) for a period of two (2) years and fine of Rs.5,000/- for offence
punishable u/s 201 IPC. In default of payment of fine, the convict is
further sentence to undergo simple imprisonment (SI) for a period of
three (3) months.
Before parting it, it must be noted that dwindling sex ratio against
female is concerned of one and all. The girl are very precious. There are
various social evils prevalent in our society which discourage the parents
to have girl child and above all is the safety of girl child. The parents
must be educated to take measures for safety of girl child particularly
from the close known persons and it is also duty of enforcement agency
to not take any complaint of small children lightly and act with
promptitude so that precious life can be saved.
I may also express that the parents of such child remains shaken
throughout their life not only for the loss of the life but in the manner the
life was lost. It is also necessary that adequate machinery be put in place
for their counselling to help them to come out of the traumatic situation
which they have faced. I express my deep sympathy with the parents and
sibling of this poor girl.
I also record deep appreciation of the amicus curiae and the public
prosecutor who had ably assisted me to arrive at correct conclusion in
this case.
The benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C be given to the convict.
The death penalty reference is being sent to hon'ble High Court of
Delhi for the confirmation of the same.
FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 12 of 43
-13-
The convict is also informed that he can file the appeal against the
judgment within a period of 30 days as per Article 115 of The Limitation
Act, 1963.
Certified copy of the judgment and order on sentence alongwith
duly attested copy of charge, evidence, statement of accused, exhibited
documents be given to the convict, free of cost.
The exhibits be preserved till the confirmation of death penalty by
the hon'ble High Court. The file be prepared as per Rule 34 of Chapter
24 Part B Vol. III of Delhi High Court Rules and be sent to Hon'ble
High Court and remaining part be consigned to record room alongwith
original judgment and order on sentence.
Announced in the open court
today i.e. on 10.02.2012
GURDEEP SINGH
ASJ-03/Outer/Rohini/ Delhi
10.02.2012
FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 13 of 43
-14-
IN THE COURT OF SH. GURDEEP SINGH
ADDITIONAL SESSION JUDGE-03, OUTER DISTRICT
ROHINI COURTS:DELHI
FIR No. : 447/2007
PS : Bawana
U/s : 302/363/366/376/377/201 IPC
Unique Case ID : 02404R0 658232007
In the matter of
The State
Versus
1. Vinod @ Dantla s/o Sh. Mohan Lal Bahadur
R/o H. No. C-II/1090, Sec-27
Rohini, Delhi.
...ACCUSED
Session Case No. : 49/08
Date of Institution : 09.11.2007
Date of Committal : 22.12.2007
Date of reserving judgment/order : 24.01.2012
Date of pronouncement : 28.01.2012
J U D G M E N T
1. Accused Vinod @ Dantla was sent up by police of PS Bawana to stand trial for offence punishable U/s 363/376/377/302/201 IPC on the allegations that on 14.08.2007 ASI Babu Lal was present at the police post, and complainant Mahipal came and got his statement recorded that he is having three children and his eldest daughter Simran aged about six and half years who was playing outside her house at about 9:45 p.m has gone missing and she could not be traced despite efforts. On the basis of the same, FIR u/s 363 IPC was registered. In the meantime, an information FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 14 of 43 -15- was received at Police Post Shahbad Dairy that chopped hands of one child found at Sulabh Sochalaya C-II, Sec. 27 Rohini. On the basis of the same call, ASI Deepak Malik reached at at Sulabh Sochalaya C-II, Sec. 27 Rohini near Dwrakadheesh Public School where in the sulabh sochalaya in the toilet meant for women from two different toilets hands (forearm) of child were found. Crime team was called and spot was got inspected. On receiving the information ASI Babu Lal busy in the investigation on the said case, also came alongwith complainant at the sulabh sochalaya where complainant identified the arms of his daughter Simran. The hands were seized and sent to the B.J.R.M. Hospital. Effort was made to search body but could not be traced. One contractor Ghanshyam Yadav during the investigation stated that about 4 months ago he had taken tender from DDA of Sulabh Sochalaya, however except this toilet remaining toilets are closed. The toilet opens from 5:00 a.m. to 10:30 p.m. night and the said toilet was closed on 13.08.2007 at about 11:00 p.m. because people were stilling using the same and on 14.08.2007 as usual he opened the same at about 5:00 p.m. and at about 6:00 a.m. 3/4 women came for toilet and immediately thereafter returned perplexed and told him that in the toilet chopped hands are lying. On this he went and found hands in two different toilets facing each other and he also become perplexed. Thereafter one Kapil who had also come to use toilet, seeing him perplexed, from his (contractor) mobile phone he called police over 100 number. In the meantime, complainant Mahipal told SI Deepak Malik that FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 15 of 43 -16- while he was searching his daughter he came to know that his wife has become unwell on account of Simran and thereafter he went back to home and his daughter Smriti was also troubling her and since he was already troubled he scolded his daughter to stop crying and do not disturb him and on this his daughter Smriti told that Papa, Deedi Simran Ko Dantla Apne Sath Le Gaya Hai. He also told that while his daughter Simran went missing while playing, his daughter Smriti was also playing outside the house. Thereafter Smriti was interrogated and her statement was recorded. The real name of Dantla came to be known as Vinod s/o Mohan Lal Bahadur. He was searched and he was not found in his house and was found sitting at West Yamuna Canal near Khera Kalan Pullia and he was apprehended at the instance of complainant Mahipal and on interrogation he confessed the crime. He got recovered the dead body of deceased Simran with cut hands from in between the bushes, vacant plot DDA which was identified by complaint to be that of his daughter Simran. Crime team was called and the spot was got photographed. The accused also got recovered the weapon of offence i.e. gandasa/farsa from his house.
2. Accused was got medically examined. The postmortem was got conducted on the dead body of deceased and her chopped hands by Dr. Kulbhushan Goyal who opined cause of death as combined effect of asphyxia and haemorrhagic shock consequent upon manual strangulation and liver injury respectively and postmortem findings are consistent with inflicting manual FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 16 of 43 -17- pressure exerted by the assailant over neck and the resistance offered by victim for survival and liver injury is caused by blunt pressure inflicted over abdoman by assailant. Injury no.1 and 2 are post mortem in nature and injury no. 3 to 6 are ante-mortem. Postmortem (P.M.) finding are consistent with attempt to penetrate the adult penis into infantile vagina (injury no.5) and injury no.6 are consistent with penetration of adult penis with friction at anal canal. Injuries at vaginal and anal orifices are as a result of sexual assault. Manual pressure over neck and liver injuries are sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature individually or collectively. He further opined that injuries no.1 i.e. postmortem dismembering limbs are caused by striking of some heavy, sharp cutting weapon with relatively sharper blade and injury no.2 i.e. post mortem injury over forehead is caused by blunt force impact and time since death is about 40 hrs. Regarding weapon of offence i.e. gandasa/farsa, the doctor gave subsequent opinion that injury no.1 mentioned in postmortem report i.e. postmortem dismembering of both upper limbs at the level of elbow and forearms are possible by this weapon or by similar sketch type of other weapon. Exhibits were deposited in FSL Rohini. Scaled site plan of the spot was got prepared. After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was filed against accused.
3. After supplying the necessary copies to the accused, the case was committed to the court of session vide order dated 22.12.2007 by Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate.
FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 17 of 43 -18-4. My Ld. Predecessor vide order dated 30.04.2008 after finding prima-facie, charged the accused Vinod @ Dantla for offence punishable U/s 363/366/376/377/302/201 IPC to which, he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. The prosecution in support of their case examined as many twenty three (23) witnesses :-
6. The prosecution examined following material witnesses :-
i. PW- Kapil is the witness of recovery of chopped hands in the toilets, Sulabh Sochalaya and who informed the police over 100 number.
ii. PW-2 Sh. Ghanshyam Yadav is the contractor of the Sulabh Sochalaya and witness of recovery of chopped hands and seizure of chopped hands.
iii. PW-3 Baby Smriti is the younger sister of deceased.
iv. PW-7 Sh. Mahipal is the father of the deceased Simran and is witness of arrest of accused and recovery of dead body with chopped hands and recovery of weapon of offence gandasa/pharsa. He proved his statement made to police as Ex.PW-7/A, the disclosure statement of accused as Ex.PW-7/B, arrest memo as Ex.PW-7/C, jamatalashi as Ex.PW-7/D, seizure memo of blood stained earth and earth control from the spot as Ex.PW-7/E, seizure memo of dead body as Ex.PW-7/F, sketch of pharsa as Ex.PW-7/G and its seizure memo as FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 18 of 43 -19- Ex.PW-7/H, his statement regarding identification of dead body and chopped hands as Ex.PW-7/J and Ex.PW-7/K respectively, receipt as Ex.PW-7/L and identification memo regarding the sulabh sochalya as Ex.PW-2/C. He identified the pharsa as Ex.P1.
7. The prosecution also examined following formal witnesses : -
i. PW-4 Dr. N. Masand, Medical Officer, Maharishi Balmiki Hospital is the doctor who medically examined patient/accused Vinod @ Dantla and taken blood sample, semen sample, under garments, nail clippings, pubic hairs, scalp hairs, coronal swab and opined that there was nothing to suggest that Vinod Dantla was incapable of sexual intercourse and he proved the MLC as Ex.PW-4/A. ii. PW-5 Dr. K. Goyal, BJRM Hospital, Jhangirpuri, Delhi is the doctor who conducted postmortem on the dead body of deceased and chopped forearms. He proved the detailed postmortem as Ex.PW-5/A, rough sketch of weapon of offence as Ex.PW-5/B and subsequent opinion as Ex.PW-5/C. iii. PW-6 SI Matadeen is the Incharge Mobile Crime Team North-West District, who inspected the spots i.e. Sulabh Sochalya, Sector-27, Rohini and DDA Vacant land sarkanda Sector-27 and proved reports as Ex.PW-6/A and Ex.PW-6/B respectively.FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 19 of 43 -20-
iv. PW-8 SI Manohar Lal is the draughtman who prepared scaled site plan of Sulabh Sochalya as Ex.PW-8/A. v. PW-9 ASI Prem Singh is the duty officer who on the basis of the rukka recorded FIR and proved computerized copy of the FIR as Ex.PW-9/A and his endorsement as Ex.PW-9/B. vi. PW-10 Ct. Mahender is the photographer with mobile crime team who took eight photographs of the Sulabh Sochalaya and proved the same as Ex.PW-10/A, Ex.PW-10/B, Ex.PW-10/C and its negative as Ex.PW-10/A1 to A8. He also took photographs of vacant land DDA and proved the photographs as Ex.PW-10/D, Ex.PW-10/E and Ex.PW-10/F and its negatives as Ex.PW-10/D1 to D10.
vii.PW-11 HC Ramarao is the duty constable for DD entry writer at PP Shahbad Dairy who recorded DD Entry vide No. 8 PP, regarding lying of two chopped hands in Sulabh Sochayala at C-2, Sector-27, Rohini on the wireless message and proved the copy of the said DD entry as Ex.PW-11/A. viii.PW-12 ASI Mohan Singh is the witness who was posted at PCR I.T.O. and received a call made by one Kapil regarding lying of chopped hands of a gril at Sulabh Sochayalaya and he filled up the PCR form 1 and informed the PCR Command Room and PP FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 20 of 43 -21- Shahbad Dairy PS Bawana and proved the PCR Form as Ex.PW-12/A. ix. PW-13 Sh. A. K. Chaturvedi, who was the metropolitan magistrate at the relevant time, before whom an application was moved for recording evidence of child but he stated that he did not record the statement giving opinion that the child was not in a position to make the statement and he proved the proceedings as Ex.PW-13/A and Ex.PW-13/B. x. PW-16 HC Shemsher Singh is the witness who got conducted medical examination of accused Vinod @ Dantla done from the M. B. Hospital, Pooth Khurd and collected his MLC alongwith seven sealed pullandas from concerned doctor and handed over the same to Inspector H.S. Meena, who seized the same as Ex.PW-16/A. xi. PW-19 HC Raj Kumar is the MHC(M) with whom the case properties were deposited and who got deposited the same to FSL and he proved the copy of relevant entries as Ex.PW-19/A, Ex.PW-19/B, Ex.PW-16/C, Ex.PW-16/D. xii.PW-20 HC Virender Singh is the witness who had taken the exhibit to the doctor vide R/C No.178/21/7 for subsequent opinion regarding weapon of offence.FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 21 of 43 -22-
xiii.PW-21 HC Mahender Singh is the witness who got deposited the exhibits at FSL Rohini vide RC185/21/07.
8. The prosecution also examined following witnesses of arrest and investigation :
i. PW-14 Ct. Mandeep is the witness who reached alongwith SI Deepak Malik to Sulabh Sochalaya on the information and witness of recovery of chopped hands from toilets, seizure of exhibits from spot i.e. toilet and seizure of hands, arrest and disclosure statement of accused, recovery of dead body at the instance of accused from vacant land, (near) Dwarkadhish Public School, site plan prepared by IO, seizure of exhibits from the spot, seizure of dead body. He is also witness who got conducted the medical examination of accused done and handed over the seven sealed parcel to IO who seized the same as Ex.PW-14/A and in addition to other memos he also proved seizure memo of four sealed parcels as Ex.PW-14/B which were handed over to them by the doctor who conducted the postmortem.
ii. PW-15 ASI Madan Lal is the witness who also joined the investigation of this case and witness of recovery of dead body at the instance of accused, seizure of exhibits from the spot from where the dead body was recovered and recovery of blood stained gandasa at the instance of accused from his house. He identified the farsa as Ex.P1 FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 22 of 43 -23- and dirty top and black pant as Ex.P2 and P3.
iii. PW-17 HC Yogesh Kumar is the witness who got registered the FIR on the basis of rukka given by ASI Babu Lal.
iv. PW-18 ASI Babu Lal is the witness who recorded statement of complainant Mahipal and prepared rukka on the same and got the FIR registered. He is also witness of recovery of chopped hands from sulabh sochalaya and identification of the same from complainant.
v. PW-22 SI Deepak Malik is witness of seizure of chopped hands, exhibits from the sulabh sochalaya, site plans, arrest and disclosure statement of accused and recovery of farsha/gandasha. In addition to other memos, he proved the site plan as Ex.PW-22/A of the sulabh sochalaya, site plan of the place from where she was reported to be missing as Ex.PW-22/B, site plan of the place from where the dead body was got recovered as Ex.PW-22/C, form 25.35 as Ex.PW-22/D and brief fact Ex.PW-22/E and statement of Jagdish as Ex.PW-22/F regarding identification of dead body and he also identified the farsa/gandasa.
vi. PW-23 Inspector H. S. Meena, SHO is the investigating officer. He is witness of recovery of two chopped hands of one girl and identification of the same, arrest and FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 23 of 43 -24- disclosure statement of accused, recovery of dead body and weapon of offence at the instance of the accused, preparation of sketch of weapon of offence and its seizure. He in addition to other memos proved request Ex.PW-23/A for conducting postmortem. He also identified the farsa/gandasa.
9. After conclusion of the trial, statement of accused u/s 313 Cr.PC was recorded wherein he denied the prosecution evidence and claimed innocence. He stated ignorance about the fact that earlier PW-7 was residing in same locality at Kriti Nagar Jhuggies where he was residing and used to visit jhugi of sala (brother-in-law) of PW-7 later on they were shifted to Sector-27 Rohini. He admitted his medical. He further stated that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case.
10. He also stated that he has no role to play in the alleged incident in any manner. He was not present in the house or in the area at the time of alleged incident and when, her returned from his work from Beriwala Bagh at about 9.30 p.m. only then he came to know that Simran is missing and he even helped the parents of Simran in finding her till next day and thereafter police officials removed him to the PS from the Sulabh Sauchalaya Complex, where he accompanied the father of deceased Simran and kept in wrongful confinement there and was mercilessly beaten after removing his clothes and later on implicated him in the present case. He also stated that nothing was recovered from his FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 24 of 43 -25- possession or at his instance as alleged. he was forced to sign on blank papers at PS, which were later on converted into various memos including his alleged disclosure statement. Even Mahipal and his wife had told the police officials that, he had no role to play in the alleged incident in any manner whatsoever, besides, the several persons from the locality who had also deposed in his favour before the police officials. But the police officials paid no heed towards their deposition. The alleged weapon of offence had been planted upon him by the police officials. He stated that he would lead evidence in his defence, however, subsequently his counsel made statement that he does not want to examine.
11. I have heard Sh. A. K. Srivastava, Ld. Addl. PP for the state and Ms. Sadhna Bhatia, Advocate, Amicus Curiae for accused. I have gone through the record.
12. The case is based on circumstantial evidence and law on the subject is well settled by Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of U.P. Vs. Satish, AIR 2005 Supreme Court 1000. Observed with approval the law laid down in Padala Veera Reddy Vs. State of A. P. (AIR 1990 SC 79) it was held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that when a case rests upon circumstantial evidence, such evidence must satisfy the following tests :
i) the circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn, must be cogently and firmly established ;
ii) those circumstances should be of a definite tendency FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 25 of 43 -26- unerringly pointing towards guilt of the accused;
iii) the circumstance, taken cumulatively, should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability the crime was committed by the accused and none else; and
iv) the circumstantial evidence in order to sustain conviction must be complete and incapable of explanation of any other hypothesis than that of guilt of the accused and such evidence should not only be consistent with the guilt of the accused but should be inconsistent with his innocence.
The accused can be convicted on the basis of circumstantial evidence, if the chain of circumstance complete.
13. In the present case, the prosecution has relied upon the following circumstance :
i. Deceased was last seen in the company of accused by younger sister Smriti ii. Finding of chopped forearm of deceased Simran in the toilet Sulabh Sochalaya.
iii. Recovery of dead body with cut off hands at the instance of accused.
iv. Recovery of weapon of offence i.e. gandasa/farsa at the instance of accused from his house and subsequent FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 26 of 43 -27- opinion of the doctor that forearm can be chopped by weapon of offence i.e. gandasa/farsa or with such type of offence.
14. PW-7 Sh. Mahipal, father of deceased Simran testified that he had three children and deceased Simran was his eldest daughter who was aged about 6 ½ yrs and on 13.08.2007, she was playing in the vacant plot adjacent to our house in the evening and till the late hours she had not turned back to house and they started searching her but could not traced her and ultimately reported the matter to the police at 4:30 a.m. night on 14.08.2007 and police recorded his statement. He further stated that in the early (sic) hours of 14.08.2007 the police officials accompanied him to Sector-27 Rohini and they heard some ladies saying that two chopped hands were lying in the toilets at Sulabh Sochalaya. He alongwith police reached there and SI Deepak Malik also reached and saw that chopped hands were lying in the toilet and he identified the hands that these were of his daughter and he stated that he identified them from the old injury scar. Other police officials also reached and police recorded his statement regarding identification of the hands and police lifted the blood stains floor and earth control and seized the same. The chopped hands were also seized and chopped hands were sent for postmortem. The health of his wife Kavita was not well and he went to attend her and his other daughter Smriti was weeping. He scolded her that he is already tensed as Simran is not traceable and he is searching for her and his daughter Smriti told him that Dantla had taken away Simran. He FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 27 of 43 -28- forwarded this information to the police officials, Dantla is name of one Vinod who is also residing in their locality. He stated that he knows accused Vinod Dantla when they were residing at Kirti Nagar Jhuggi and he (accused) also used to visit the jhuggies of his sala(brother-in-law) and his (witness) at Kirti Nagar as well as Sec. 27 Rohini and he (accused) was also know to his kids. Thereafter he alongwith police made a search for accused Vinod Dantla and he (accused) was apprehended from Nahar Ki Pulia village Khera Kalan. Accused was interrogated and he confessed the guilt and made disclosure statement and was arrested. He further stated that accused led the police party to vacant land DDA in the bushes and pointed out that he had hidden the dead body in the bushes and after getting aside the grass, the dead body of child having hands chopped was recovered. He identified the dead body of his daughter Simran. Blood stains were lifted from the spot. He further stated that accused also led the police party to sulabh sochalaya and identified the place and accused also identified the place from where he had kidnapped his daughter i.e. vacant plot no.13 and site plan of the respective places were also prepared. He also stated that accused also led the police party to his house and got affected the weapon of offence (gandasa/pharsa) and blood stains were there on the pharsa. Sketch was prepared. He identified the pharsa.
15. PW-2 Sh. Ghanshyam Yadav testified that in the year 2007, he was having a tender to maintain three-four sulabh sochalaya in Sector-27, Re-establishment Colony and only one sulabh FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 28 of 43 -29- sochalaya was functioning and used to be remained open from 5:00 a.m. to 10:30 p.m. On 13.08.2007, the sulabh sochalaya was closed at 11:00 p.m. as the people were using the same and next morning the sulabh sochalaya was opened at 5:00 a.m. (sic) and the male members of the locality started using the same and one Kapil also came there and after using the same, he came to him and they were talking with each other. He stated that at about 6:40 a.m., three four ladies came there to use the sochalaya and immediately, they came back and were shocked and they told to them that a chopped hands of a child were lying in the toilets. He himself went inside the toilets and found two chopped hands of a child in the toilet. The crowd also gathered there. He became very nervous on seeing the said chopped hands and Kapil asked him to call at 100 number but he told that since he was not in a condition to make a call, let Kapil make a call at 100 number which he did. Thereafter, police in PCR and local police came there. One Mahipal of the same locality also reached there, who identified both the hands of her daughter who had been missing since evening of the day prior. Police seized the same. He further stated that on the same evening, the police again visited the spot, alongwith accused and he also signed the memo.
16. PW-1 Kapil testified that on 14.08.2007 at about 5:30 a.m. he went to Sulabh Sochalaya No.2, Sector-27, Rohini for answering the call of nature and thekedar of the sulabh sochalaya was present there and after answering the call of nature, he started talking to Ghanshyam. At about 5:45 p.m., 3-4 ladies came out of FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 29 of 43 -30- the ladies toilet in a nervous condition and told to Ghanshyam that the cut hands of child are lying inside the toilet and Ghanshyam went inside the toilet to check. He came out side in nervous condition and told him that cut hands of a child are lying in the toilet. He told him to inform the police over 100 number but he was nervous and gave his mobile phone no.9210336649 to him to inform the police and informed the police over 100 number. He also stated that Mahipal resident of the same colony also arrived at the spot and identified the cut hands to be that of his daughter.
17. PW-3 Baby Smriti was a child aged about five years. The court after putting questions to understand whether the child is capable to understand the questions put to her recorded her statement without oath. In answer to the question as to where your sister had gone, she stated that she is alongwith Dantla (Danta ke satha), in reply to question where is Simran now, she stated that Dantla had killed her (Dantla ne maar diya) and she pointed out the fingers towards the accused.
18. Ld. Counsel on behalf of accused submitted that last seen evidence could not be proved as the child was found to be incompetent and her testimony is not reliable. As regards alleged carnal intercourse, no injury was seen on the penis of the accused since it is alleged that accused has committed rape on small child which will necessarily injured the penis. Further the chain of circumstances is not complete.
19. As regards the last seen evidence, the child was found to be FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 30 of 43 -31- competent by my Ld. Predecessor. However, PW-3 Baby Smriti stated in her cross-examination that this facts that Dantla had taken her sister Simran was told by her father and whatever she has stated was told to her by her father. The statement of this witness was not recorded by Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate u/s 164 Cr.PC after giving opinion that the child was not competent to give statement and at that time she was 3 ½ years of age and that when she was examined in the court, was aged about 5 years and yet she has stated that whatever was told by her father, she has stated so in the court. Therefore, this witness who was even otherwise not competent at the relevant time, her statement was recorded and subsequently also shows that she has been tutored to make statement in the court, therefore, no reliance can be placed on the testimony of this witness. Therefore the last seen evidence could not be established against the accused.
20. Now coming to the other circumstance i.e. recovery of dead body with cut off hands at the instance of the accused. PW-7 Mahipal father of the deceased Simran stated that accused Vinod Dantla was apprehended from Nahar Ki Pulia village Khera Kalan, he was interrogated and confessed the guilt and made disclosure statement and was arrested. He further stated that accused led the police party to vacant land DDA in the bushes and pointed out that he had hidden the dead body in the bushes and after getting aside the grass, the dead body of child having hands chopped was recovered. He identified the dead body of his daughter Simran. Blood stains were lifted from the spot. In her cross-examination FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 31 of 43 -32- he denied the suggestion that he first time saw the accused in the PS on 14.08.2007 between 11:00 to 12:00 noon. He also denied the suggestion that dead body of his daughter Simran was recovered before accused was arrested in this case. However, there is no cross-examination on the aspect of recovery of dead body at the instance of the accused.
21. PW-14 Ct. Mandeep is another witness regarding recovery of dead body at the instance of accused. He stated that the accused led the police party towards Dwarkadhish Public School in the vacant land and pointed out towards the bushes and there one chopped hand dead body of girl was lying and the face of the dead body was downwards. In his cross-examination, he admitted that public persons had accompanied them at the Dwarkadhish Public School near vacant land but he does not remember whether public persons had signed any of the memos. He had not noticed any blood stains on the cloth worn by the accused.
22. PW-15 ASI Madan Lal is another witness of recovery of dead body. He testified that accused led the police party to that place and pointed out towards the bushes present there and stated that after committing rape with the girl Simran he strangulated her and after chopping her both hands had hidden the body there and the accused thereafter from the bushes after removing the grass, shown the dead body of the girl child. The body was without hands and the complainant identified the dead body and the dead body was lying with her face towards the earth. In his FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 32 of 43 -33- cross-examination, he stated that he reached vacant land near Dwarkadheesh Public School at about 5:00 p.m. He remained at the spot till 9:15 p.m. He admitted that the place from where the dead body was recovered is an open space which is accessible to the public persons at large.
23. PW-22 SI Deepak Malik corroborated other witness regarding recovery of dead body at the instance of accused. He stated that accused led the police party towards the southern side of Dwarkadhish School i.e. the bushes in a vacant plot of DDA Land, Sector-27, Rohini and pointed out towards a dead body having hands chopped in the bushes and complainant identified the dead body. He, however, denied the suggestion that vacant plot, located on the southern side of Dwarkadheesh School is frequented by public persons for easing themselves and also used as public thoroughfare. He had mentioned the condition of the body in which the same was found in the recovery memo. The dead body was not found smeared with mud and soil and voluntarily stated that some pieces of bushes were found lying on the dead body. He had not noticed any mark of dragging the dead body at the spot, from where the dead body was recovered.
24. Ld. Defence counsel submitted that the place from where the dead body was recovered was a vacant plot of DDA and was open place accessible to the public and therefore it was not within exclusive knowledge of accused.
25. The recovery memo of the dead body which is Ex.PW-7/F is an FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 33 of 43 -34- important document. According to the same, in vacant plot of DDA Land, Sector-24, Rohini Delhi on the southern side in front of Dwarka Dheesh School, there are bushes (jhund) and the dead body of a girl aged about 6/7 years having chopped hands was lying facing earth. As per the scaled site plan Ex.PW-8/A there are bushes of sarkanda shown on point 'C' and point 'C' is place from where dead body was recovered. There is boundary wall on one side and boundary wall is broken in mid way and there is kacha way going across the other side but the place where the bushes are shown is secluded place much away from the kacha rasta. One witness has stated that the place was frequented by the public persons whereas other witness stated that it was not frequented by the public persons for easing themselves. Although it is an open place in large area but from the site plan it appears that the place where the dead body was lying is secluded. Public persons frequented that plot from passing through that area on a kacha path way, which was much away from the place the dead body was lying. The dead body was lying in the green sarkandas not visible from a distance. As would be depicted from the photographs Ex.PW-10/E and Ex.PW-10/D and also as per photograph Ex.PW-10/F there was sarkandas having length of more than height of a person to hide the dead body. As per photograph Ex.PW-10/F, it is taken from a distance, if one watches the same one cannot make out that it is dead body and only a red colour cloth of child is seen. Therefore the dead body was hidden at that place which was not visible from a distance and FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 34 of 43 -35- therefore this fact was within exclusive knowledge of the accused and the disclosure statement of the accused to the effect that he can get recovered the dead body is admissible against accused which led to the discovery of the dead body. All the witnesses have corroborated each other. There are minor inconsistencies in their testimony in the manner in which the accused had taken and shown the dead body. Apart from the same there is nothing material which has come which discredit the witnesses regarding recovery of the dead body at the instance of the accused. Therefore the prosecution has succeeded establishing on record that the dead body, which was lying in a hidden place, was got recovered by the accused.
26. Now coming to the other circumstance i.e. recovery of weapon of offence gandasa/farsa at the instance of the accused. PW-7 Mahipal father of the deceased stated that that accused also led the police party to his house and got affected the weapon of offence (gandasa/pharsa) and blood stains were there on the pharsa. He identified the pharsa. In his cross-examination, he stated that accused used to reside with his mother and mother of accused was present and was sitting outside the house when they went to the house of the accused. There was crowd also present. But he does not know whether police officials called the neighbour of accused to be a witness to the proceedings. He also does not know whether mother of the accused was made a witness. PW-15 ASI Madan Lal stated that accused thereafter voluntarily led the police party to his house situated at C-II/1090, Sector-27, Rohini and got FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 35 of 43 -36- recovered from a room from beneath one iron box, one farsa/gandasa and the blade of the gandasa was blood stained. Sketch was prepared. In the cross-examination, he admitted that the house of accused is located at thickly populated residential area. None collected at the house from neighbourhood when they reached and the house was a single storey. However, he does not remember whether the house of accused was opened or locked at that time and who all were present at the house of accused when they visited there. There were no blood stains below the iron box where the gandasa was found lying. No blood stains were found on the iron box under which the gandasa was lying. No finger prints were lifted from the gandasa. They remained at the house of accused till 11 p.m.
27. PW-22 SI Deepak Malik stated that accused also led the police part to his house and got effected the recovery of farsa/gandasa from underneath the iron box, lying in the room of his house. In his cross-examination, he stated that SHO had tried to join the public persons of the locality in the investigation at the house of accused but none agreed to join the investigation. He does not remember whether sketch of the house from where the weapon of offence was recovered was prepared by the IO or not. The iron box underneath which the weapon of offence was found lying was not seized. No finger prints were lifted from the weapon of offence seized from the house of accused. No blood stains were noticed around the spot, from where the weapon of offence was recovered. The mother of the accused was not joined in the FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 36 of 43 -37- investigation by the SHO. They left the house finally at about 9:30 p.m.
28. PW-23 Inspector H. S. Meena SHO similarly stated that accused also led the police party to his house and got effected the recovery of farsa/gandasa from underneath the iron box, lying in the room of his house at C2/1090, Sector-27, Rohini. He prepared the sketch of the same and seized the same. In his cross-examination, he stated that when they reached at the house of accused, the same was opened and mother of the accused was present there, however, he does not remember how many storey are there and he stated that he visited the ground floor and there was only one room and one kitchen. He called the neighbours to join the investigation, but none agreed. The farsha was found to be blood stained and the iron box was not seized. No blood stains were found underneath the iron box as well as on the ground from where the farsha was lifted. Therefore there are minor inconsistencies in the statement of witnesses with respect to time when they finally left the house of the accused and whether the house was opened or not. However, the witnesses are consistent that the mother of the accused was present at the house when they reached. They are also consistent that no blood stains was found on the iron box or on the ground floor from where the farsha was lifted. Minor inconsistencies at the points which do not go to the root of the matter can be safely ignored. The testimony of the father of deceased who is public person lends credence to the proceedings conducted in the investigation and recovery effected FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 37 of 43 -38- at the instance of the accused. Therefore, prosecution has succeeded in proving that the weapon of offence i.e. farsha/gandasa was recovered at the instance of the accused from his house.
29. With respect to missing report and finding of chopped hands, PW-7 stated that his dauther Simran missing on 13.08.2007 in the evening hours and he reported the matter with the police. PW-1 and 2 have proved that they have found chopped hands of a child in sulabh sochalaya in the ladies toilet which was identified by the complainant to be that of his daughter. PW-5 Dr. K. Goyal is the doctor who conducted postmortem on the dead body. Firstly he proved that the chopped hands i.e. forearms are that of the dead body. Secondly, he has given age estimation from dismembering parts of the dead body as in between 6 to 7 years. He also given opinion regarding the weapon of offence i.e. farsha that the postmortem injury no.1 was caused by striking of some heavy sharp cutting weapon and relatively sharper blade and opined that farsha or such type of other weapon can cause such injury.
30. As per FSL result, which is admissible in evidence, the weapon of offence had human blood but the blood grouping could not given. Therefore it is proved on record that the forearm of the body of the child was chopped with farsha which was got recovered at the instance of the accused.
31. There is one more important circumstance against the accused i.e. his medical examination Ex.PW-4/A. As per his medical FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 38 of 43 -39- examination, the doctor had opined that there is nothing to suggest that patient is incapable to perform sexual intercourse and undergarment stains found positive and matting of pubic hair also found positive. However, pubic hairs could not be examined as hairs could not be detected on dirty top and pant i.e. P1 and P2 which are cloth of the deceased.
32. Now coming to the argument of Ld. Defence Counsel that sexual intercourse and carnal intercourse is not possible without sustained injury on the penis. The injury on the male organ does not necessarily caused if the sexual intercourse is done on small child. Reference can be made from the judgments i.e. State of Himachal Pradesh v. Raghubir Singh, (SC) 1993 (1) Cur. L. J. 496 and Jagdish Maur v. State (Delhi) 1986 (1) R.C.R. (Criminal)
477. In the present case, there are three indicators showing that accused had indulged in sexual activity. There was staining on his undergarments, matting of his pubic hairs and absence of smegma.
33. Therefore as per discussion above, I am of the opinion that prosecution has succeeded in proving following circumstance :
i. Deceased simran went missing on 13.08.2007 night and finding of chopped forearm of deceased Simran in the toilet Sulabh Sochalaya.
ii. Recovery of dead body with cut off hands at the instance of accused.FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 39 of 43 -40-
iii. Recovery of blood stained weapon of offence i.e. gandasa/farsa at the instance of accused from his house.
iv. Subsequent opinion of the doctor that forearm can be chopped by weapon of offence i.e. gandasa/farsa or with such type of offence.
v. Opinion of doctor that sexual intercourse and carnal intercourse was committed with child before killing.
vi. Accused had indulged in sexual activity soon before his medical examination.
vii.Recovery of chopped forearms of child of complainant from locked public toilet.
34. The circumstance proved by the prosecution are fully established and they point towards the accused being only culprit and chain of circumstances commencing from the missing of the child, finding of chopped hands of the child, arrest of the accused, recovery of the dead body with cut off hands, and weapon of offence at a very short interval would points towards the guilt of the accused. Further the blood stains on the farsha and present of staining of his undergarments and metting of his pubic hairs further points towards the accused being the the culprit.
35. The circumstances are cogently and firmly established, and have definite tendency unerringly pointing towards the guilt of the accused and circumstance taken cumulatively forms a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 40 of 43 -41- all human probability the crime was committed by the accused and none else and circumstances are so that are incapable of explanation of any other hypothesis than that of guilt of the accused and are consistent with the guilt of the accused and are inconsistent with his innocence.
36. Therefore prosecution has succeeded in proving that the child was kidnapped from lawful guardianship of her parents and accused committed sexual intercourse and carnal intercourse before killing and chopping her hands, and thereafter strangulated her with intent to kill her and in his intention to kill her is established as he after killing her mercilessly chopped her hands and also by throwing of the chopped hands in ladies toilet he tried to destroy the evidence to conceal himself from punishment punishable under offence 201 IPC. Therefore I am of the opinion that prosecution has succeeded in proving offence punishable u/s 363/376/377/302/201 IPC against accused.
37. Now coming to the defence of the accused. The accused has claimed that he was not present in the house or in the area at the time of alleged incident and when, her returned from his work from Beriwala Bagh at about 9.30 p.m. only then he came to know that Simran is missing and he even helped the parents of Simran in finding her till next day and thereafter police officials removed him to the PS from the Sulabh Sauchalaya Complex, where he accompanied the father of deceased Simran and kept in wrongful confinement there and was mercilessly beaten after FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 41 of 43 -42- removing his clothes and later on implicated him in the present case. Even Mahipal and his wife had told the police officials that, he had no role to play in the alleged incident in any manner whatsoever, besides, the several persons from the locality who had also deposed in his favour before the police officials. But the police officials paid no heed towards their deposition. In the present case accused Vinod @ Dantla is known to the complainant Mahipal and his kids. Admittedly there is no animosity between the father of the deceased child and the accused and even he claims that the father and mother of the child had told the police officials that he (accused) has no role in the incident yet the father of the child has categorically deposed regarding recovery of dead body and blood stained weapon of offence at the instance of accused. The father of the deceased has even stated that his younger child Smriti had told him that Dantla had taken Simran away. Although, the evidence of the child is not accepted yet it is parents of the child howsoever small may be can understand language of the child, which further lends credence to the prosecution case and in the face of overwhelming evidence on record, I am of the opinion that defence of the accused does not appeal to reason and circumstances are so that are incapable of explanation of any other hypothesis than that of guilt of the accused and are consistent with the guilt of the accused and are inconsistent with his innocence.
38. As per discussion above, I am of the opinion that prosecution has succeeded in proving offence punishable u/s 363/376/377/302/201 FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 42 of 43 -43- IPC against accused Vinod @ Dantla beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly accused is convicted for said offences.
39. Let accused be heard on quantum of sentence.
Announced in the open court today i.e. on 28.01.2012 GURDEEP SINGH ASJ-03/Outer/Rohini/ Delhi 28.012012 FIR No. : 447/2007, PS : Bawana Page 43 of 43