Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Vasant Jaiwant Palande, was convicted by the Sessions Court for the murder of a 15-year-old girl (Chhoti @ Sujata @ Sulochana) and for attempt to commit rape. The victim went missing on 13.10.2011, a day when there was no school due to elections. Her parents, who had gone to work, found her missing upon return. The next morning, her body was found in a well. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence: the appellant was last seen with the victim; blood-stained clothes and a weapon were recovered at his instance; and medical evidence suggested sexual assault. The appellant failed to explain the circumstances under Section 106 of the Evidence Act. The High Court upheld the conviction, finding the chain of circumstances complete and consistent only with the appellant's guilt. The appeal was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Circumstantial Evidence - Last Seen Theory - Sections 302, 376, 511 IPC - The appellant was convicted for murder and attempt to rape of a 15-year-old girl based on circumstantial evidence including last seen together, recovery of blood-stained clothes and weapon, and failure to explain the death - Held that the chain of circumstances was complete and consistent only with guilt of appellant (Paras 2-20).
B) Criminal Law - Attempt to Rape - Section 376 read with Section 511 IPC - Medical evidence and recovery of semen-stained clothes indicated attempt to commit rape - Held that the prosecution proved the attempt beyond reasonable doubt (Paras 15-18).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC and Section 376 read with Section 511 IPC based on circumstantial evidence is sustainable.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence upheld
Law Points
- Circumstantial evidence
- last seen theory
- recovery of incriminating articles
- presumption under Section 106 Evidence Act
- conviction for murder and attempt to rape
Case Details
2019 LawText (BOM) (03) 219
Criminal Appeal No. 153 of 2014
B.P. Dharmadhikari, Prakash D. Naik
Mr. Uday Warunjikar, i/b. Nikhilesh Pote for the Appellant; Mr. Arfan Sait, APP for the respondent State
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against conviction for murder and attempt to rape
Remedy Sought
Appellant sought acquittal from conviction under Section 302 and Section 376 read with Section 511 IPC
Filing Reason
Appellant was convicted by Sessions Court and sentenced to life imprisonment for murder and rigorous imprisonment for three years six months for attempt to rape
Previous Decisions
Sessions Court convicted the appellant on 09.09.2011 in Sessions Case No. 141 of 2010
Issues
Whether the conviction based on circumstantial evidence is sustainable
Whether the last seen theory and recovery of articles prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that the evidence was insufficient and circumstantial
Prosecution relied on last seen evidence, recovery of blood-stained clothes and weapon, and medical evidence
Ratio Decidendi
The chain of circumstantial evidence, including last seen together, recovery of incriminating articles at the instance of the appellant, and failure to explain the death, was complete and consistent only with the guilt of the appellant, warranting conviction under Section 302 and Section 376 read with Section 511 IPC.
Judgment Excerpts
The appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 374(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure challenging the judgment and order dated 09.09.2011 passed by the District Judge – 12 and Additional Sessions Judge, Pune in Sessions case No. 141 of 2010, convicting the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.3,000/- and also convicting the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 376 read with Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code thereby he was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and six months and to pay fine of Rs.3,000/-.
The victim was a young girl of 15 years of age. She was ravished by the accused and since he did not succeed in his attempt of committing rape on her, he committed murder of the victim Chhoti @ Sujata @ Sulochana.
Procedural History
The appellant was convicted by the Sessions Court on 09.09.2011. He appealed to the High Court under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. The High Court heard the appeal and dismissed it on 15.03.2019.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 302, 376, 511
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.): 374(2)
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872: 106
