Bombay High Court Considers Confirmation of Death Sentence in POCSO and Murder Case. The Trial Court Convicted the Accused for Rape and Murder of his Minor Daughter, Imposing Death Sentence Requiring High Court Confirmation under Section 366(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY
  • 4
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case arose from Crime No. 634 of 2022 registered at Police Station Kalamna, Nagpur, initially for offences under Sections 305, 306, 376 of the Indian Penal Code and the POCSO Act based on an FIR lodged by the maternal aunt of the victim against other family members. During investigation, the role of the accused, Guddu Chhotelal Rajak, father of the victim, came to light. The victim, a minor girl, was found hanging in her house on 6 November 2022. The accused was present, and suicide notes were recovered implicating four other persons who were later discharged. The investigation revealed that the victim had been raped and that the accused had photographed her while alive, standing on a stool with a rope around her neck, and had taken photographs of the suicide notes earlier in October 2022. The statement of the younger daughter (PW-1) disclosed that the accused forced the victim to stand on a stool, tied a rope, and removed the stool, causing her death. The postmortem confirmed rape. The accused was also found to have subjected his children to cruelty. Consequently, the police added sections of murder, attempt to murder, hurt, false information, conspiracy, POCSO, and Juvenile Justice Act. After investigation, a charge-sheet was filed, and the trial was conducted before the Special Court (POCSO) and Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur. The prosecution examined 25 witnesses including the victim's sister, medical experts, police officials, handwriting expert, and digital evidence analysts. The trial court convicted the accused on 21 May 2024 for multiple offences. He was sentenced to death under Section 302 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, life imprisonment under Sections 307 and 120-B IPC, and rigorous imprisonment for other offences, with fines. He was acquitted under Section 201 IPC. The trial court referred the death sentence to the High Court for confirmation under Section 366(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The accused also filed an appeal challenging the conviction and sentence. Both matters were heard together on 22 April 2025. The judgment was pronounced on 11 November 2025. The provided excerpt of the judgment does not include the court's analysis or final decision; it primarily sets out the prosecution case, witnesses, and documents.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure - Death Sentence Confirmation - Section 366(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Mandatory confirmation by High Court - The trial court sentenced the accused to death for murder and rape, requiring confirmation proceedings. The matter was referred to the High Court for confirmation as per statutory mandate. (Paras 3-4)

B) Criminal Law - Offence of Murder - Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Father convicted for murder of minor daughter - The prosecution case was that the accused, the father of the victim, caused her death by hanging after forcing her onto a stool, tying a rope, and removing the stool. The trial court convicted him based on the evidence of his younger daughter and photographic evidence. (Paras 2, 12-13)

C) Criminal Law - Offence of Rape of Minor - Sections 376(2)(f), 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Aggravated penetrative sexual assault by father - Postmortem report revealed that the victim, a minor, was raped. The accused, being her father, was convicted for the aggravated offence. (Paras 13-14)

D) Evidence - Child Witness - Statement of younger sister - Crucial testimony - The younger daughter (PW-1) stated that her father caused the victim to stand on a stool, tied a rope around her neck, and removed the stool, leading to her death. This evidence formed the basis for the conviction. (Paras 12-13)

E) Criminal Law - Offences Against Public Justice - Sections 182, 193, 194, 196, 203, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Fabrication of false evidence and conspiracy - The accused was also convicted for various offences related to false information, conspiracy, and destruction of evidence, including photographing the incident and suicide notes. (Paras 2, 11)

F) Juvenile Justice - Cruelty to Children - Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 - Assault on children - The investigation revealed that the accused used to beat his children mercilessly, leading to conviction under this provision. (Paras 13)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the death sentence imposed by the trial court should be confirmed under Section 366(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Whether the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court for offences under Sections 302, 376(2)(f), 376(2)(n), 307, 323, 182, 193, 194, 196, 203, 120-B IPC, Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012, and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, are sustainable.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 LawText (BOM) (12) 130

Criminal Confirmation Case No. 02 of 2024 and Criminal Appeal No. 322 of 2024

2025-11-11

Anil S. Kilor, J. and Pravin S. Patil, J.

Shri D. V. Chauhan, Senior Advocate and Public Prosecutor; Shri A.S. Mardikar, Senior Advocate

State of Maharashtra

Guddu Chhotelal Rajak

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal confirmation case and appeal against conviction and death sentence.

Remedy Sought

Confirmation of death sentence by the State and challenge to conviction by the accused.

Filing Reason

The trial court sentenced the accused to death, requiring confirmation under CrPC; the accused filed appeal against conviction.

Previous Decisions

The Special Court (POCSO) and Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur convicted the accused on 21/05/2024 for multiple offences including murder, rape, and others, and sentenced him to death among other punishments.

Issues

Whether the death sentence imposed by the trial court should be confirmed under Section 366(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973? Whether the conviction recorded by the trial court for offences under Sections 302, 376(2)(f), 376(2)(n), 307, 323, 182, 193, 194, 196, 203, 120-B IPC, Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012, and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, is sustainable on evidence? Whether the sentence of death is appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the rarest of rare doctrine?

Submissions/Arguments

The accused challenged the conviction and sentence in the appeal, asserting that the evidence was not sufficient to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. The State sought confirmation of the death sentence, arguing that the crime was brutal and the accused, as the father, committed rape and murder of his minor daughter, warranting the extreme penalty.

Judgment Excerpts

The victim girl was the elder daughter of the accused. He has a younger daughter named ‘N’, and a son named Gaurav. the accused caused the victim girl to stand on a stool and tied a rope around her neck. He later removed the stool, which caused the death of the victim girl.

Procedural History

FIR No. 634 of 2022 was lodged on 06/11/2022 initially against other persons for offences under Sections 305, 306, 376 IPC and POCSO Act. Investigation revealed the role of the accused, and the initial accused were discharged. The accused was arrested and charge-sheeted for murder, rape, and other offences. Trial was conducted before the Special Court (POCSO), Nagpur, which convicted the accused on 21/05/2024. The trial court sentenced the accused to death, necessitating confirmation by the High Court under Section 366(1) CrPC. The accused also filed Criminal Appeal No. 322 of 2024. Both matters were heard together on 22/04/2025, and judgment was pronounced on 11/11/2025.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 302, 307, 323, 182, 193, 194, 196, 203, 120-B, 376(2)(f), 376(2)(n), 201, 305, 306, 376
  • Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act): 6, 3, 4
  • Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015: 75
  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): 366(1)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Allows Appeal in Income Tax Case on Applicability of Section 40A(3) — Cash Payment for Property Purchase Not Disallowable as Business Expenditure. Section 40A(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961 applies only to revenue expenditure, n...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Upholds Petitioner Company in Reduction of Share Capital Case Under Sections 100-104 of Companies Act, 1956. Court-Ordered Valuation Found Plausible; Minority Objectors Failed to Prove Unfairness.