'Intention Clear From Brutality': Gujarat High Court Upholds Man's Life Sentence For Raping, Throttling Minor To Death

The Gujarat High Court has upheld the conviction and life sentence of a man found guilty of rape and murder of a minor girl in Dahod district in 2013, holding that the prosecution had established a complete chain of circumstantial evidence pointing to the accused's guilt.A Division Bench of Justice Ilesh J. Vora and Justice R.T. Vachhani dismissed the appeal filed by Mukeshbhai Gorchandbhai Chamka challenging a 2014 judgment of the Sessions Court which had convicted him under Sections 376 (rape) and 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code. The Court held that the trial court had correctly appreciated the evidence and that the prosecution had proved the case beyond reasonable doubt. The Bench observed:“We find that the learned Sessions Court correctly evaluated the evidence, considered the defense arguments, and rightly held that the offences under Sections 376 and 302 IPC are proved beyond reasonable doubt. The essential elements of rape non-consensual penetration of aminor are fully established. The victim was below the age of consent (proved through consistent parental testimony, even though the defense disputes whether the age was 13, her minority is not in dispute), and therefore she could not consent. As regards murder, the intention/knowledge is clear from the brutality, throttling after rape shows a deliberate intention to kill, or at least knowledge that death was likely, and the case falls within the thirdly clause of Section 300 IPC...On overall consideration, we find that the chain of circumstantial evidence is complete and unbroken, clearly pointing to the guilt of the appellant, supported by the consistent testimonies of key witnesses including the complainant and the last seen witness, prompt FIR, medical evidence, FSL reports and the appellant's post-offence conduct. Accordingly, no interference is called for in the appeal.”According to the prosecution, the incident occurred on 8 April 2013 in Uchvania village, Dahod district during a marriage ceremony. The victim, a minor girl aged about 13 years, had attended a traditional short procession or “Vana ceremony” held at the house of a villager. After the ceremony ended around 12:30 a.m., the accused allegedly took the girl to a nearby field. The prosecution case was that he raped the minor and, when she shouted for help, smothered her, resulting in her death. The victim's body was later found in a nearby field.The victim's father lodged an FIR the same day at Dahod Rural Police Station, following which the police carried out investigation and filed a chargesheet. The Sessions Court convicted the accused and sentenced him to life imprisonment in 2014. Appearing for the appellant, Advocates Gajendra P. Baghel and Shambhukumar, contended that the conviction was unsustainable as the prosecution case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence and the chain of circumstances was not complete due to lack of direct eyewitness evidence of the intercourse. It was argued that the complainant's testimony had material inconsistencies and the FIR was tutored and influenced by local villagers. No “independent” witnesses corroborated the last seen theory and the medical evidence showed no external drag marks or defensive wounds which was “highly unnatural.” Opposing the appeal, Additional Public Prosecutor Ronak Raval submitted that the prosecution had successfully established a complete chain of circumstances proving the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. He argued that the testimony of the last-seen witnesses clearly showed that the appellant had taken the minor victim away shortly before the incident, and this was corroborated by the medical evidence and FSL reports. The APP contended that the trial court had correctly appreciated the evidence on record and that no interference was warranted with the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant accused. The High Court examined the testimonies of several prosecution witnesses, including witnesses who were privy to the “last-seen” circumstance, i.e., who had last seen the victim with the accused. The eye-witness confirmed that they had seen the accused forcibly taking the victim away from the house shortly after the ceremony ended.The Bench noted that “There is no material inconsistency between the FIR and the prosecution Evidence”, and the witnesses' testimony remained unshaken in cross-examination.The postmortem report revealed injuries to the private parts, rupture of the hymen, and the presence of semen in the vagina, along with multiple ante-mortem injuries on the body. The cause of death was recorded as asphyxia due to smothering, indicating homicidal death following sexual assault.The Court also relied on forensic evidence, including blood-stained soil and other samples collected from the crime scene and sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, which corroborated the prosecution's version of events.After analysing testimonial and medical evidence, the Court emphasized that although the ...

'Intention Clear From Brutality': Gujarat High Court Upholds Man's Life Sentence For Raping, Throttling Minor To Death

Ananya Tangri

Tags