Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court heard criminal appeals by special leave preferred by two appellants against the common judgment of the High Court of Uttarakhand, which partially upheld their conviction and sentences. The case originated from an incident on 20th November 2014, when a minor girl, Ms. K, went missing during a wedding ceremony at Kathgodam. Her father lodged a missing person report the next day. Four days later, on 25th November 2014, the child's body was discovered near Gaula River, showing signs of sexual assault and blunt force trauma. The post-mortem report indicated death due to shock and haemorrhage from injuries to the vaginal and perianal region. The investigation, led by the police with assistance from the Special Task Force, used call detail records and surveillance to trace the suspects. Appellant No. 1 was arrested in Ludhiana, Punjab, and purportedly confessed to the crime, implicating appellant No. 2 and another accused. The prosecution alleged that the appellants, along with a third accused, abducted the child, sexually assaulted her, and left her dead body in the forest. After a full trial, the trial court convicted appellant No. 1 under Sections 376A, 363, and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, and under Sections 3/4, 5/6, and 7/8 of the POCSO Act, sentencing him to death, while acquitting him of conspiracy and IT Act charges. Appellant No. 2 was convicted under Section 212 IPC for harbouring the offender, but acquitted of the principal offences. The High Court, on appeal, affirmed the convictions and sentences except for the acquittal of both appellants under Section 66C of the Information Technology Act. The appellants then approached the Supreme Court, which granted leave to appeal. The Supreme Court's final determination on the merits, including the challenge to the conviction and the death sentence, was not captured in the provided text. The factual narrative details the investigation, evidence, and the lower courts' findings, but the Supreme Court's reasoning, decision, and ratio decidendi remain unknown.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Offences Against Children - Conviction under Section 376A IPC and Sections 3/4, 5/6, 7/8 of POCSO Act - Death Sentence - The trial court convicted the appellant for rape and murder of a minor girl, and the High Court affirmed the conviction and death sentence, while acquitting him of Section 66C of the IT Act (Para 3, 4.8, 4.9). B) Criminal Law - Kidnapping - Section 363 IPC - Conviction for kidnapping a minor girl from the custody of her lawful guardian - The trial court convicted the appellant under Section 363 IPC, and the High Court affirmed the conviction (Para 3, 4.8, 4.9). C) Criminal Law - Destruction of Evidence - Section 201 IPC - Conviction for causing disappearance of evidence of the crime - The trial court convicted the appellant under Section 201 IPC, and the High Court affirmed the conviction (Para 3, 4.8, 4.9). D) Information Technology Law - Identity Theft - Section 66C of the IT Act, 2000 - The High Court acquitted both appellants of the charge under Section 66C, setting aside the trial court's conviction (Para 3). E) Criminal Law - Harbouring Offender - Section 212 IPC - The trial court convicted the second appellant under Section 212 IPC for harbouring the main accused, and the High Court affirmed the conviction and sentence (Para 3, 4.8, 4.9).
Issue of Consideration
46174_2019_6_1501_64040_Judgement_10-Sep-2025
