Guddu @ Jitendra Kumar Gangwar vs State of Uttar Pradesh

The Trial Court and the High Court have convicted the accused/ appellant for the offence under Sections 302 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code. The Trial Court, after hearing the appellant, imposed sentence of death punishment and referred the matter to the High Court for confirmation of the death punishment. The High Court, on evaluation of the material on record, though confirmed the order of conviction passed by the Trial Court, concluded that it is not a fit case to impose death punishment and, thus, imposed the sentence of imprisonment for life.

Heard Mr. Vinod Kumar Parihar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tyagi, learned counsel appearing for the State and perused the records.

It is an unfortunate case wherein the incident of rape and murder of a minor girl has taken place within the sugarcane field belonging to the father of the accused. The deceased was taking a bundle of Pural (straw - cattle feed) on her head towards her house and she was dragged by the accused inside the sugarcane field for about 50 to 60 ft. and thereafter the crime was committed. Elu (PW-2) and Ramshri (PW-3), who are the family members of the deceased, after finishing their agricultural operations started proceeding towards their house. At that point of time, they heard the cries of the deceased girl and went towards the scene wherein they saw the dead body lying in the pool of blood. They also saw the accused running away from the scene holding a blood stained Hasiya (a sharp cutting weapon) in hand. The evidence on record reveals that the Hasiya was seized during the course of investigation at the instance of the accused and the said Hasiya was sent to Forensic Science Laboratory for examination so also the clothes of the deceased were sent to the Forensic Science Labouratory. The report of the Forensic Science Laboratory reveals that the Hasiya was containing human blood stains whereas the clothes of the deceased were having semen.

In our considered opinion, both the courts on facts are justified in concluding that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and the depositions of PW-2 and PW-3 fully prove that the accused was running away from the scene with blood stained Hasiya in his hand. As mentioned supra, said Hasiya was seized from the accused. The Forensic Science Laboratory reports, though do not specify that the blood and the semen are of the appellant, clearly revealed that they contain the human blood and the semen respectively. The evidence cannot be read in isolation. It has to be read harmoniously in its entirety while coming to the conclusion. It cannot be forgotten that the incident has taken place in a sugercane field which normally will have water for the irrigation purposes. Therefore, certain amount of loss of scientific evidence might have occurred.

Be that as it may, having regard to the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, no interference is called for inasmuch as the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal fails and is dismissed accordingly.