Direct electronic evidence and scientific corroboration establish guilt in aggravated sexual assault and homicidal murder.

The Appellant was convicted for the rape and murder of a 55-year-old mentally unstable woman

On the intervening night of April 4–5, 2022, CCTV footage captured the Appellant dragging the deceased by her hair and assaulting her

The deceased was later found with catastrophic injuries, including a fractured skull and a ruptured uterus resulting from the insertion of an iron rod

Following a memorandum statement under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, the police recovered a blood-stained iron rod and clothing from the Appellant

The Trial Court sentenced the Appellant to life imprisonment until natural death under Sections 376(2)(l)(m), 376(A), and 302 of the IPC

The Appellant challenged the conviction primarily on the grounds of misappreciation of circumstantial evidence

1. Whether the death of the deceased was homicidal in nature?

2. Whether the circumstantial evidence, including the "last seen" theory and electronic evidence, establishes the guilt of the Appellant beyond reasonable doubt?

The court applied Section 302 (Murder), Section 376 (Rape), Section 376(2)(l)(m) (Rape of a person with mental disability), and Section 376A (Rape causing death or persistent vegetative state) of the Indian Penal Code

Procedurally, it applied Section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act for the admissibility of electronic CCTV evidence

Section 27 regarding the discovery of facts based on an accused's disclosure

The court relied on the Panchsheel principles of circumstantial evidence established in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra, requiring an unbroken chain of events

It further applied Section 106 of the Evidence Act regarding the burden of proving facts especially within one’s knowledge, as interpreted in State of Rajasthan v. Kashi Ram

The Court found the medical evidence conclusive of homicidal death, noting multiple lacerated wounds and internal organ rupture caused by a blunt object

Regarding the chain of circumstances, the Court held that the CCTV footage placed the victim in the exclusive company of the Appellant shortly before her death, invoking the "last seen" theory

Under Section 106, the Appellant failed to offer any explanation for the victim's injuries or the presence of human blood found on his seized clothing and the iron rod

The Cyber Forensic Lab report authenticated the CCTV footage, identifying the Appellant and ruling out tampering

The Court observed that the insertion of an iron rod fell squarely within the definition of rape under Section 375 IPC

Integrating the forensic, medical, and "last seen" evidence, the Court determined that the chain of circumstances was complete and inconsistent with any hypothesis of innocence

The Court held that the prosecution successfully proved the Appellant's guilt through a complete chain of circumstantial evidence

It further noted that the barbaric nature of the crime—targeting a vulnerable, mentally unstable woman—shocks the collective conscience of society and warrants the strictest judicial response

The Appellant remains in custody to serve his remaining term