The Allahabad High Court while setting aside a conviction for rape and murder of a minor girl held that mere apprehension howsoever strong cannot be the substitute for evidence that alone can justify the implication of an accused and it is unfortunate that despite there being no evidence against the accused-appellant he has been forced to remain in jail for over twelve years.
Brief Facts:
The present appeal has been filed by the appellant, challenging the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Additional Session Judge, whereby the accused-appellant has been convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment under sections 302, 376 IPC and 3(2)(V) SC/ ST Act with a fine of Rs.5,000/-.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that this is a case in which the accused-appellant has been falsely implicated only on account of suspicion of the parents of the deceased. it was further submitted that absolutely no evidence of any kind had been produced by the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused-appellant. Submission is that it is neither a case of direct evidence nor any circumstance adverse to the accused-appellant that has been produced so as to implicate him. The argument is that without any cogent evidence produced during the trial against the accused-appellant he has remained in jail for over twelve years and that as the trial court has not correctly appreciated the evidence on record, the judgment of conviction and sentence is liable to be set aside.
Observations of the court:
The court noted that the deceased was a girl aged about 11 years, who died on account of ten injuries caused to her and further her dead body was recovered at about 08.00 am on 19.03.2012. It is on the basis of information received by family members that the accused applicant has been implicated in the present case. Further, the court stated that this is not a case of direct evidence against the accused applicant. This is also not a case falling in the category of circumstantial evidence, inasmuch as none of the circumstances has been produced by the prosecution to implicate the accused-appellant.
Further, the court noted that the appellant has been implicated in the absence of any material pointing against him and stated that the only basis to implicate the accused-appellant is the suspicion on account of the alleged reclaiming of land by the informant from the accused-appellant about three years back and then observed that mere apprehension howsoever strong cannot be the substitute for evidence which alone can justify implication of an accused.
The court stated that the trial court had not carefully examined the records and in its anxiety to convict the accused had proceeded to deliver the judgment even without any evidence appearing on record against the accused-appellant and further noting that the accused has been in Jain since 2012, the court observed that it is unfortunate that despite there being no evidence against the accused-appellant he has been forced to remain in jail for over twelve years.
The decision of the Court:
The court concluding that the prosecution has failed to establish its case against the accused appellant beyond reasonable doubt, allowed the appeal and set aside the order of conviction.
Case Title: Nanhaku Singh vs State of U.P.
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3674 of 2016
Advocate for the Petitioner: Anupam Tripathi
Advocate for the Respondent: G.A.
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
