Case Note & Summary
The matter involves the confirmation of a death sentence and an appeal arising from the trial court's conviction of the accused for the rape and murder of a three-year-old girl. The child went missing on 30 September 2013 while playing with her dog, and her body was found in a mud pond on 2 October 2013. The autopsy revealed death due to head injury with extensive genital injuries, indicating brutal sexual assault before death. The accused was arrested on 3 October 2013 and charged under sections 302, 363, 376(2)(i), 201 IPC and sections 4, 8 of the POCSO Act. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence: the accused was seen near the spot with muddy legs, his room contained blood and hair, and medical examination showed injuries on his penis consistent in age with the crime, which he did not explain. The father of the victim expressed suspicion about a man with muddy legs he had seen. The accused challenged the conviction, arguing that there was no direct evidence and that the father did not initially name him. The High Court heard both the confirmation case and the appeal, reserved judgment on 26 October 2021, and pronounced it on 25 November 2021. The judgment examined the evidence, including witness testimonies and medical reports, and considered the legal principles applicable to confirmation of death sentences in such rarest of rare cases.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Circumstantial Evidence - Last Seen Theory and Medical Evidence - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 302, 376(2)(i) - The prosecution case rested on circumstances that the accused was seen near the spot with muddy legs soon after the child went missing and his room contained blood and hair; additionally, he had injuries on his penis consistent in age with the time of crime. The Court noted these circumstances as significant and that the accused failed to explain the injuries (Paras 9-10, 13-14).
B) Criminal Law - Death Penalty - Confirmation Proceedings - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 366 - The High Court was hearing a confirmation case for death sentence passed by the trial court. Under Section 366 CrPC, the High Court must review the entire evidence and determine guilt and appropriateness of the death penalty. The Court examined the evidence on record (Paras 1-2).
C) Protection of Children from Sexual Offences - Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault and Sexual Assault - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Sections 4, 8 - The accused was convicted for aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a child below 12 years (Section 4) and sexual assault (Section 8). The victim, a 3-year-old girl, suffered extensive genital injuries leading to her death, indicating the brutal nature of the assault (Paras 2, 13).
D) Evidence - Medical Evidence - Autopsy Report and Age of Injuries - The autopsy revealed death due to head injury with extensive genital injuries, with maggots indicating death 3 days prior. The accused's medical examination showed injuries on his penis aged 4-5 days, matching the time of the incident. The Court observed that this medical evidence strongly corroborated the prosecution's case (Paras 13-14).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction and death sentence imposed on the accused for offences under sections 302, 363, 376(2)(i), 201 IPC and sections 4, 8 of the POCSO Act are sustainable; whether the death penalty is the appropriate sentence.
Law Points
- confirmation of death sentence under Section 366 CrPC
- circumstantial evidence in criminal cases
- medical evidence of injuries on accused
- last seen theory
- unexplained injuries on accused
- POCSO Act aggravated penetrative sexual assault
- death sentence proportionality
Case Details
2021 LawText (BOM) (11) 35
Confirmation Case No. 1 of 2019 with Criminal Appeal No. 661 of 2019
Smt. Sadhana S. Jadhav, Prithviraj K. Chavan
Mr. Sachin R. Pawar a/w Mr. Nikhil Mallelwar a/w Rohan Dilip Kaiche a/w Amjith Anandhan for the Respondent in Conf. Case No.1 of 2019 and for the Appellant in Apeal/661/2019, Ms. M.M. Deshmukh, APP for the State, Ms. Rebeca Gonsalvez, Advocate appointed for Respondent No. 2 in Cr. Appeal No. 661/2019
State of Maharashtra (Confirmation Case No. 1/2019) and Ramkirat Munilal Goud (Criminal Appeal No. 661/2019)
Ramkirat Munilal Goud (Confirmation Case), State of Maharashtra and Manoj Bhaskar Sadavarte (Criminal Appeal)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Confirmation of death sentence under Section 366 CrPC and criminal appeal against conviction for offences under IPC and POCSO Act involving rape and murder of a 3-year-old girl child.
Remedy Sought
The State sought confirmation of the death sentence passed by the trial court; the convict appealed against his conviction and death sentence.
Filing Reason
The trial court had convicted the accused and imposed death penalty for the brutal sexual assault and murder of a minor child, necessitating confirmation under Section 366 CrPC; the accused challenged the conviction.
Previous Decisions
The District Judge-7 & Special Judge under POCSO Act, Thane, in Special Case (Child Protection) No138/2013, convicted the accused under Sections 302, 363, 376(2)(i), 201 IPC and Sections 4, 8 POCSO Act, and sentenced him to death and life imprisonment, vide judgment dated 8/3/2019.
Issues
Whether the conviction of the accused based on circumstantial evidence is sustainable?
Whether the death sentence imposed on the accused is proportionate and appropriate in the circumstances?
Submissions/Arguments
The appellant/accused argued that the case rests solely on circumstantial evidence and that there is no direct evidence linking him to the crime; the father of the victim did not initially name the accused, and no test identification parade was conducted; the evidence is insufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The State/prosecution submitted that the chain of circumstances is complete: the accused was seen near the spot with muddy legs shortly after the child went missing, his room contained blood and hair of the victim, he had recent injuries on his penis consistent with the sexual assault, and he failed to offer any explanation for those injuries; medical evidence corroborates the timeline.
Judgment Excerpts
A bud of rose was crushed before it bloomed, a kite was torn when about to fly, the budding flower was crushed to ashes and the kite took the soul away.
This is yet another sad saga of a three year old girl child, who was playing with her little dog, when she was noticed by a knave man who was driven by a desire of lust upon the sight of a little happy harmless child playing in her own world.
Death due to head injury with extensive genital injuries.
The accused has not offered any explanation for the injuries sustained by him.
Procedural History
The trial court (District Judge-7 & Special Judge under POCSO Act, Thane) convicted the accused and sentenced him to death and life imprisonment on 8-3-2019. The State filed Confirmation Case No. 1/2019 for confirmation of the death sentence under Section 366 CrPC. The accused filed Criminal Appeal No. 661/2019 challenging the conviction and sentence. The High Court heard both matters together and reserved judgment on 26-10-2021, pronouncing it on 25-11-2021.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 302, 363, 376(2)(i), 201
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012: 4, 8
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 235(2), 366
