High Court
Case Details
Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 337 of 2016 [Arising out of judgment of conviction dated 12.01.2016 and order of sentence dated 14.01.2016 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur in Sessions Trial No. 284 of 2013] Arvind Vishal @ Tera son of Satyadeo Vishal, resident Village Guhiapal, P.O. & P.S. Bahragora, District Singhbhum (East) --Versus-- The State of Jharkhand …. …. …. Respondent .... …. Appellant .... For the Appellant For the State : Mr. C.S. Pandey, Advocate : Mr. Vishwanath Roy, Spl.P.P.
Legal Reasoning
PRESENT: SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ----- SRI GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J. ----- JUDGMENT Reserved on: 22.10.2024 Pronounced On: 28.10.2024 Per Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J. Sole appellant is before this Court against the judgment of conviction and sentence under Sections 302, 201 and 376A of the IPC. He has also been convicted under Section 6 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act (hereinafter in short referred as ‘POCSO Act’), but no separate sentence has been inflicted in view of Section 42 of the POCSO Act. 2. This is yet another case where a minor aged about eight years was brutally ravished and then done to death. 3. Informant is the father of the deceased and as per the fardbeyan. On 26.02.2013, he had gone to the mining area where he was working as a labour. In the evening at 5 O’ clock when he returned home, his younger daughter aged eight years (Victim) had not returned home. When by 6.30 p.m. she did not return, they started looking for her, but could not find her. On 27.02.2013 at 6 O’ clock in the morning, her naked dead body was found in a dry well in Village Charkara. It transpired that on 26.02.2013 at around 4 O’ clock, victim had been last seen going with the appellant towards the field, and since then she had not been seen and the appellant had also been absconding since morning. From the physical appearance of the dead body, it appeared to be a case of rape and murder. 4. On the basis of the fardbeyan, Bahragora P.S. Case No. 21/2013 was registered on 27.02.2013 under Sections 302, 376, 201 of the IPC and Sections 4/8 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act against the appellant. 1 Police on investigation found the case true and submitted charge sheet under Sections 302, 376A, 201 of the IPC and Sections 4, 6 and 8 of POCSO Act and the appellant was put on trial under Sections 302, 376A, 201 of the IPC and Sections 4, 6 and 10 of POCSO Act. 5. Judgment of conviction and sentence has been assailed on the ground that there is no eye witness to the incidence and the appellant has been convicted only on the basis of circumstantial evidence. 6. 7. Learned A.P.P. has defended the judgment of conviction and sentence. Altogether 15 witnesses have been examined on behalf of the prosecution and the relevant documents including seizure list of the wearing apparel of the victim, inquest report, post-mortem examination report have been proved and marked as exhibits. 8. Homicidal death in a most brutal manner with injury on the private part of the deceased, has been proved by the Doctor (P.W. 13) which is as under: - Abrasion i. ii. iii. iv. v. vi. vii. viii. ix. x. xi. xii. 4 cm x 2 cm left forehead. 3 cm x 2 cm left chin. 2 cm x 2 cm right forehead. 7 cm x 4 cm front of chest. 3 cm x 2 cm, 2 cm x 1 cm, 2 cm x 2 cm front of abdomen. 3 cm x 2 cm left forearm back. 2 cm x 2 cm left arm back. 2 cm x 2 cm right knee front. 1 cm x 1 cm left leg front. There was complete fracture of Tibia and fabula bones. 3 cm x 1/2 cm left thigh medial. 4 cm x 1/2 cm left thigh back and 1/4 cm x 1/4 cm, 1/4 cm x 1/2 cm left Labia Majora. Lacerated wound: - i. ii. 3 cm x 1/2 cm x scalp deep on parietal region of head. 4 cm x 2 cm x scalp deep with contusion of occipital scalp 5 cm x 4 cm right side. Bruise i. ii. 5 cm x 4 cm left side of face. 3 cm x 2.5 left Labia Majora. 2 iii. 9. 3 cm x 2 cm right Labia Majora. Prosecution case rests only on evidence of last seen. P.W. 11 and P.W. 12 are child witnesses, who were playing with the deceased when the appellant took her away. P.W. 11 has deposed that appellant said something in the ear of the victim and then she went along with him. His testimony is corroborated by his earlier statement in terms of Section 157 of the Evidence Act. Testimony of P.W. 12 is also on the same line, who happens to be the brother of the deceased. He had also seen the appellant returning from the said field where he had taken the victim and forbade him to go in that direction. He has also deposed that he had given something to her to eat while taking her. I do not find any reason to disbelieve the testimony of these child witnesses. 10. Recovery of the dead body on the next day has been proved by the witnesses as well as the I.O. 11. Learned trial Court has discussed at length the evidence and the circumstances on the basis of which the inference of guilt has been drawn. Judgment of conviction is affirmed. On the point of sentence considering the age of the appellant, sentence under Section 376 A is converted into 20 years. Sentence under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC is not interfered with. All the sentences to run concurrently. Criminal Appeal stands dismissed with modification of sentence.
Decision
Pending Interlocutory Application, if any, is disposed of. Let the Trial Court Records be transmitted to the Court concerned along with a copy of this judgment. (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) (Ananda Sen, J.) Ananda Sen, J. I agree. High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated, 28th October, 2024 AFR/Anit 3