Patna HC upholds acquittal in 8-year-old girl’s murder case, sends judgment to Bihar Home Department for review under investigation-accountability directions

The appellant, father of an eight-year-old girl, challenged the acquittal of Guddu Manjhi by the Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge (POCSO), Patna, of charges under Sections 376 and 302 IPC, Section 4 of the POCSO Act, and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act.

The prosecution alleged that the child went missing on the evening of 27 August 2015 and was found dead the next morning in an under-construction building; the post-mortem attributed death to asphyxia by smothering.

The trial court found that the prosecution had not established rape or linked the accused to the killing, and acquitted him.

The father appealed, relying principally on alleged last-seen evidence and the medical evidence.

1. Whether the trial court’s acquittal was contrary to the evidence or involved an error warranting appellate interference.

2. Whether the prosecution evidence, including the alleged last-seen circumstance and forensic evidence, established the accused’s involvement in the victim’s death and the charged sexual offences.

The charges were under Sections 376 and 302 of the IPC, Section 4 of the POCSO Act, and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act.

The prosecution was required to establish the accused’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt; unexamined witnesses’ statements recorded under Section 161 CrPC could not, in the circumstances of this case, establish the alleged last-seen circumstance.

The Court also relied on State of Gujarat v. Kishanbhai, (2014) 5 SCC 108, which calls for State-level review of acquittals, identification of investigative or prosecutorial lapses, and appropriate departmental action where warranted.

The Court found no reliable trial evidence that the victim had been seen with the accused: the father’s account was not reflected in his fardbeyan, the mother had not witnessed the accused taking the child, the alleged supporting witnesses were not examined, and PW-9 denied knowing or identifying the accused.

The autopsy established death by smothering but did not establish rape; the forensic reports detected human blood on the exhibits but no semen, and no evidence connected the blood to the accused.

In the absence of evidence connecting the accused to the occurrence, the Court held that the trial court had committed no error in extending the benefit of doubt.

It directed that a copy of the judgment be sent to the Bihar Home Department to consider the directions in Kishanbhai and the Court’s subsequent decisions; copies were also directed to the Director General of Police, Bihar, and the Director, Directorate of Prosecution, Bihar, and the trial-court record was to be returned.