The Delhi High Court, recently comprising of a bench of Justices Anish Dayal and Mukta Gupta upheld the conviction of the petitioner in a case under Section 302/34 and 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code 1860 and enhanced the sentence to rigorous life imprisonment. (Sikander Soni and Anr v. State)
The Bench observed, "the Trial Court did not have the power or jurisdiction to grant life sentence of more than 14 years, this Court having appreciated the facts and circumstances of this case, is of the view that the gravity and the depravity of the crime committed by the appellants was of a serious nature and therefore this Court issued notice to the said appellants and directed production in Court to show cause as to why their sentence should not be fixed for a period of more than 14 years."
Facts of the Case
As per the case of the prosecution on April 24, 2012 information was received at the Police Post Nehru Place, that a dead body of a female was lying in a semi naked condition. Police rushed to the spot and found a dead body of a female aged 24-26 years near Metro flyover in semi naked condition, wearing black/white colour top, blood oozing out from the mouth, nose and ears of the body and injury marks were all around its face. A black colour jeans with its zip broken was lying at a distance of about 10 steps from the body and broken hair was also on the body of the deceased.
On the evening of May 13, 2012, the SOS unit of Crime Branch Kotwali received information about the accused persons and on the basis of the information received, the accused Pardeep was apprehended, who disclosed his involvement in this case. Upon his disclosure, another accused Sikander Singh @ Soni was arrested from Nanak Pura who also disclosed his involvement, and his taxi was taken into possession. Upon arrest of both the appellants, they pointed out the place of incident near Nehru Stadium where they had gang raped the deceased in a car.
The Trial Court after considering the depraved and heinous nature of the crime, sentenced the appellants to life imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC along with other sentences for offences punishable under Section 376 (2)(g) IPC and Section 120 IPC besides fines imposed for all the offences. It was this impugned order that was under challenge.
Contention of the Parties
The counsel for the two men pointing out that the case was solely based on circumstantial evidence contended that no CCTV installed in the area in question was ever checked despite the fact that there were 18 cameras in place. It was also argued that the arrests of the two convicts were manipulated.
The learned Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the state countered the submissions of the appellants and submitted that what was the case of blind rape and murder was finally proved beyond reasonable doubt and the appellants had rightly been convicted. The medical evidence confirmed the DNA of the appellants on the deceased’s body and tracing of the taxi No.9551 had led the police to the appellants. Analysis of the CDR records was also conclusive as the location towers were matching with the accused with that of the deceased and that all disclosures and recoveries were made at the behest of the appellants.
Courts Observation and Judgment
After examining the evidence on record, the Bench highlighted that all critical aspects were consistent and cogent, proving the guilt of the convicts.
The Bench referred to the testimony of one of the police witnesses who had reached the scene of the crime and seen the victim’s condition, the subsequent comprehensive scientific analysis including the post mortem, the DNA profile, blood examination, biological examination and the viscera report to hold that the two men had "brutally raped” the deceased in their car.
The bench remarked, "They attempted to erase the evidence by dumping the body on the roadside and extracted her belongings and put them in different locations. Considering the brutality of the act right in heart of Delhi which is usually patrolled by police shows the depraved evil mentality of the appellants who acted with complete impunity with no fear of either the life or consequence of their act and dignity of the deceased victim."
However, the Bench relied on the decision of the apex court in Union of India v. Sriharan to observed, "...the learned Trial Court’s direction awarding the sentence of life imprisonment of not less than 20 years, would therefore be erroneous and beyond its jurisdictional power under the Penal Code."
The Court observed that the prosecution was able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, thereby upholding the impugned judgment on conviction by the Trial Court.
The Court ordered, "The order on sentence by the learned Trial Court is modified to the extent that life sentence for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC will be for rigorous imprisonment for life not less than 20 years without remission. The rest of the sentence for offence punishable under Section 376(2)(g) IPC and 201 IPC shall remain the same as awarded by the Learned Trial Court. The appeal is accordingly disposed of as per directions stated above."
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
