Full Judgment Text
Crl.A. 6-8 of 2004
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 6-8 OF 2004
C. PERUMAL ...... APPELLANT
VERSUS
RAJASEKARAN & ORS. ...... RESPONDENTS
O R D E R
1. This is rather an unfortunate case. There were
five accused in all who were sentenced by the trial
court for offences punishable under Section 376(2)(g),
201 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Section 3(2)
(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The allegation
was that the five accused, and A1 in particular, who
was the main accused and involved with the deceased in
a clandestine relationship, had raped her on the night
th
intervening the 28 and 29 of January, 1999. The trial
st
court in its judgment dated 31 August, 2000 held the
case against the accused to be proved and they were,
accordingly, sentenced to death under section 302 or
Section 302/34 of the IPC and to various terms of
imprisonment under the various other sections under
Crl.A. 6-8 of 2004
2
which they had been charged.
2. An appeal was thereafter taken by the accused to
the High Court and a reference was also made for the
confirmation of the death sentence. The High Court has
by its impugned judgment declined the reference and at
the same time allowed the appeal of the accused
acquitting them in toto.
3. The present appeals have been filed at the
instance of the complainant who is the father of the
deceased. We see from the record that A1 was the main
accused. As per the death certificate which has been
th
put on record, he has passed away on the 30 June,
2009. The appeal qua him is, accordingly, abated. We
have, accordingly, examined the evidence with respect
to A2 to A5.
4. We have gone through the evidence very carefully
keeping in view the gravity of the offence. We,
however, find that there is no evidence with respect to
the involvement of A2 to A5. The High Court has taken
cognizance of the fact and observed that certain items
had been recovered at the instance of A2 and A4 and
they were a haystack, a nylon wire and a plastic wire
which were not required to commit the murder. We see
that all these items are of common use and have not
been connected with the incident. The learned counsel
Crl.A. 6-8 of 2004
3
for the appellant has, however, argued that the
evidence of P.W. 3 would show that accused A2 to A5 had
also been seen with the deceased and A1 moving around
together. We have carefully perused the statement of
this witness and find a serious flaw therein inasmuch
that in his statement recorded under Section 161
Cr.P.C. this fact had not been mentioned by him and on
the contrary the evidence suggests that all the five
accused and the deceased had been seen together two
days earlier to the incident. The High Court was,
therefore, to our mind, justified in holding that the
time lag made it difficult to connect A2 to A5 with the
incident. We also put to the learned counsel for the
appellant if there was any other evidence with respect
to the involvement of the accused. She candidly
admitted that there was none.
5. We thus find no merit in these appeals which
are, accordingly, dismissed.
...... ..................J
[HARJIT SINGH BEDI]
........................J
[CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD]
NEW DELHI
Crl.A. 6-8 of 2004
4
FEBRUARY 03, 2011.