Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

She was carrying a purse, wallet and Nokia Mobile with her.

Criminal Appeal No.715-2015.odt

2. On 24th January, 2014, at around 7.00 a.m, when she regained her consciousness, she found herself admitted in the Hospital with several injuries on her person. She had a contusion over her head, bruises on her hands and legs as well as bite marks on her breasts. She had also pain in her private part. She realized that something had gone wrong with her.

(m) Right breast abrasion 0.3 x 2 c.m with teeth bite mark over nipple reddish in colour.

(n) Left breast reddish abrasion over arualer nature 2.2 c.m x0.4 c.m with teeth bite mark on nipple.

(o) Left side lower pack irregular abrasion of size 0.2 c.m x 0.4c.m over on area of 7x6 c.m

19. The learned Counsel for the appellant made a futile attempt to rebut the testimony of this witness. In the cross- examination, it has been reiterated that there were bruises and Criminal Appeal No.715-2015.odt abrasions on the person of the victim. There is nothing in the cross which would be helpful to the defence in any manner. I do not see any reason to doubt the well narrated evidence of Dr. Chitwan Dubey.

22. The injury photographs of the bite marks of the victim and scanned photograph of the appellant matched with each other. The overlay prepared was super imposed on the bite marks present on the victim's breast and the comparison was conducted. Her evidence further reveals that the bite mark on the right breast was about 3.3.5 c.m, on the right side specific feature of the biter's teeth was observed. While the left side was diffused. Overall shape of the arch can be observed in the photograph. The left breast exhibited bite mark which was 3.3.5 c.m wide, reddish in colour. This mark was diffused. On examination of the appellant and from the photographs of the teeth of the appellant, it was observed that the biting edge of upper right lateral incise wound was curved and tooth was supra erupted. Spacing was Criminal Appeal No.715-2015.odt present between biting edge of upper left central inciser and lateral incise wound. Spacing was also present on biting edge between right central and lateral incise wound. Abrasion was present with upper and lower and left and right canines. The pressure point on the bite mark injury on right breast coincided with the supra erupted and curve biting edge of upper right lateral incise wound of the appellant. The spacing present between the right lateral and central incisor coincided with the gap of the injury. The shape of the bite mark is consistent with the shape of appellant's upper dental arch. The bite marks present on the right breast exhibit arch of biter's teeth and the features are consistent with the feature present in appellant's dentition. She identified the appellant in the trial Court. She testified that the report was prepared by her and submitted to Powai Police station. It also bears signature of Dr. Harish Pathak, Head of the Department. The letters and photographs are proved at Exhibit 57 colly.

23. Again in the cross-examination, a futile attempt has been made by the learned Counsel to shatter the version of the expert. Certain suggestions were given which have been denied. It has been brought in the cross-examination that there are five categories namely;

Criminal Appeal No.715-2015.odt

(a) definite biter

(b) probable biter

(c) possible biter

(d) definitely not the biter

(e) inconclusive She admits in the cross that she had specifically mentioned the teeth by which there are marks on the breasts of the victim. Along with other factors, the nature of the bite marks corresponds to the teeth produced the bite marks. She categorized the appellant in a probable biter category. The evidence of this witness, indeed to a very considerable extent, establishes the fact that the bite marks on the breasts of the victim were of the appellant and none other. She denied a suggestion in the cross that there is no definite science in forensic Odontology since there are no definite specific guidelines by the Indian Medical Board. She admits that it is not imperative to collect the swab of saliva to come to a conclusion as it is a specialized branch qua the Odontology science and therefore, there was no question of collection of saliva. She admits that the guidelines which are provided by forensic Odontology are different and the guidelines are merely recommendations which may or may not be followed.