'Strong Inference Of Evidence Planting' : Supreme Court Acquits Man Sentenced To Death In Child Rape-Murder Case

The Supreme Court on Wednesday acquitted and set aside death penalty of one Akthar Ali convicted for rape causing death of a 7-year-old girl in 2014. The Court also acquitted co-accused Prem Pal Verma who was convicted for harbouring the offender.A bench of Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Sandeep Mehta allowed the criminal appeals filed by the two accused against the Uttarakhand High Court's October 18, 2019 judgment that upheld the conviction and death penalty.“The law is well settled that in cases resting on circumstantial evidence, every link in the chain must be firmly and conclusively established, leaving no room for doubt. Where two views are possible, the one favourable to the accused must be adopted. In the instant case, the prosecution has failed to prove motive, the last seen theory stands contradicted, and the alleged scientific evidence is marred by inconsistencies and serious loopholes. In such circumstances, it would be wholly unsafe to uphold a conviction, much less the extreme penalty of death”, the Court observed.The Court reiterated that death penalty can only be imposed in the rarest of rare cases on unimpeachable evidence and found that the trial court had not properly evaluated mitigating circumstances before awarding it.The case arose when the victim girl went missing from the venue of a family wedding in Haldwani on November 20, 2014. The police found her body four days later in the forest of Gaula river near Sheeshmahal – the wedding venue, after the SHO got a call from the girl's cousin informing him about the same.According to the prosecution, the accused men took the victim to the forest area, sexually assaulted her and left her covered with leaves. Akhtar Ali allegedly led police to the crime scene for recovery of the victim's hairband.Akhtar Ali was charged under Sections 376A, 363 and 201 of the IPC, Sections 3/4, 5/6 and 7/8 of the POCSO Act, 2012, and Section 66C of the IT Act. Prem Pal Verma was charged under Sections 363, 201, 120-B, 376A and 212 of the IPC, along with aforementioned sections of the POCSO Act and the IT Act. A third accused Junior Masih @ Foxy was charged under Sections 363, 376A, 201 and 120-B of the IPC, as well as under POCSO Act and the IT Act.The Special POCSO Court in Haldwani on March 11, 2016 convicted Akhtar Ali under all charges and sentenced him to death under Section 376A IPC and the POCSO Act charges, besides rigorous imprisonment for kidnapping and destruction of evidence. It convicted Prem Pal Verma only under Section 212 IPC and Section 66C of the IT Act and acquitted him of the other charges. It acquitted Junior Masih @ Foxy of all charges.The High Court upheld Akhtar Ali's conviction and death sentence and Prem Pal Verma's conviction under Section 212 IPC but acquitted both men of the Section 66C IT Act charge. Akhtar Ali and Prem Pal Verma then approached the Supreme Court challenging their convictions and sentences.The Supreme Court noted that the case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence as no one saw the incident. The prosecution relied on three circumstances – motive, last-seen theory, and scientific/forensic evidence (including DNA). While it was not disputed that the victim girl had suffered a homicidal death, the Court said that this did not automatically link the accused with the crime and each link had to be proved independently.On motive, the prosecution had alleged that accused acted out of sexual lust after seeing the minor victim leave a wedding pandal. However, the Court said that the prosecution failed to show any depraved motive corroborated by evidence.On the 'last seen theory', witnesses claimed they saw the accused near the location of the wedding on November 20, 2014, but the Court noted that their statements were recorded only on November 25 – after the body was found. Further, none of them placed the victim girl with the accused.The Court said this belated evidence appeared manufactured. It also noted that the body's location was first disclosed by the victim's cousin, Nikhil Chand. Despite his pivotal role, he was never interrogated by the investigating officers or presented in court. The Supreme Court said this omission deprived the trial court of the most vital link in the chain of circumstances because it was never explained how he knew where the body was lying when police teams had been frantically searching for days without success.“This intentional and calculated omission not only undermines the 'last seen theory' but also causes serious prejudice, as it deprives the Court and the defence of the opportunity to test whether the knowledge of Nikhil Chand was innocent or otherwise. In the absence of this crucial testimony, the last seen circumstance must be held to have completely collapsed. Non examination of Nikhil Chand compels the Court to draw an adverse inference against the prosecution”, the Court observed.The Supreme Court noted that the credibility of DNA samples depended on...

'Strong Inference Of Evidence Planting' : Supreme Court Acquits Man Sentenced To Death In Child Rape-Murder Case

Amisha Shrivastava

Tags