Jharkhand High Court Upholds Life Imprisonment for Rape and Murder of Six-Year-Old Based on Last-Seen Evidence and Absconding

The appellant, a cook employed at the same hotel where the deceased child’s mother worked, was alleged to have taken the six-year-old victim to a fair on 26.04.2013, after which she disappeared.

Her dead body was recovered from a hillock near Middle School, Kamdara, on 28.04.2013, bearing severe head and thigh injuries and genital injuries consistent with rape.

The appellant was arrested in Odisha after allegedly fleeing from the area.

The trial court convicted him under Sections 302, 376(2) and 201 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, sentencing him to life imprisonment for the offences under Sections 302 and 376(2) IPC, and seven years’ rigorous imprisonment under Section 201 IPC, with sentences to run concurrently.

The appellant challenged the conviction, principally contesting the last-seen evidence and relying on alibi.

Whether the prosecution established beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was the person last seen with the deceased and that the circumstantial evidence sufficiently connected him with the rape and murder.

Whether the appellant’s plea of alibi and the alleged absence of direct eyewitnesses created a reasonable doubt warranting acquittal.

Whether the conviction and sentences imposed by the trial court required appellate interference.

The Court applied Sections 302, 376(2) and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, concerning murder, aggravated rape and causing disappearance of evidence, respectively, and Section 6 of the POCSO Act concerning aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a child.

It applied the settled principle that a conviction may rest on circumstantial evidence where the circumstances, including reliable last-seen evidence, form a complete and convincing chain pointing exclusively to the accused’s guilt.

The Court also treated the accused’s unexplained abscondence as a relevant circumstance and rejected the plea of alibi where the defence evidence was unreliable and failed to outweigh the prosecution case.

Medical evidence establishing rape and death from shock and haemorrhage served as corroboration of the prosecution’s account.

The Court found the evidence of P.Ws. 1, 3 and 5 consistent in placing the appellant with the deceased at or near the fair shortly before her disappearance, while P.W. 9 independently stated that she had seen the appellant accompanied by a girl at approximately the same time.

The deceased’s body was recovered within two days, strengthening the temporal proximity between the last-seen circumstance and the discovery of the body.

The post-mortem evidence showed multiple grievous blunt-force injuries, ruptured hymen and vaginal tears, and opined that death resulted from shock and haemorrhage following rape and violence.

The Court further relied on the appellant’s flight to Odisha and his failure to provide a reasonable explanation under his Section 313 Cr.P.C. statement.

The alibi evidence of the appellant and his brother was rejected, particularly because the brother’s testimony was considered unreliable and inconsistent with his claimed familiarity with the appellant’s personal circumstances.

Collectively, these circumstances were held to establish the appellant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt despite the absence of a direct eyewitness.

The plea of alibi and the challenge based on the absence of eyewitnesses were rejected.

Finding no error in the trial court’s appreciation of the evidence, the Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the conviction and sentences; any pending interlocutory applications were closed.