The Supreme Court of India has acquitted a man previously convicted and sentenced to death for the rape and murder of a three-year-old girl, highlighting critical investigation lapses and unreliable evidence, including a questionable extra-judicial confession.
The primary issue in the case revolved around an alleged extra-judicial confession by the accused. During the trial, a witness claimed that the accused admitted feeling "tensed up" after the incident. However, this statement was not mentioned in the witness's Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement before the magistrate. It only appeared as an "improved version" during the trial.
Read Also: High Courts Can Quash Domestic Violence Act Complaints Using Section 482 CrPC: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court stressed that extra-judicial confessions are inherently weak and must be corroborated. The judgment, authored by Justice Sandeep Mehta, stated:
“When the witness asked the accused appellant about his absence, the accused appellant replied that he was tensed up. However, in the previous statement of the witness (PW-17) recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., there is no reference to any extra-judicial confession.”
The bench, comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol, and Sandeep Mehta, identified significant flaws in the investigation process. One critical point was the failure of the first Investigating Officer (PW-16) to record statements from key witnesses at the earliest opportunity.
Read Also: Supreme Court Forms SIT to Probe BJP Minister Vijay Shah’s Remarks Against Colonel Sofiya Qureshi
Additionally, the Court observed:
- The statements of crucial witnesses were delayed, with some being recorded only by the second Investigating Officer (PW-18) on October 3, 2013.
- The evidence of the extra-judicial confession was unreliable, as the witness (PW-17) did not immediately inform the police.
- The Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) report regarding soil sample similarity was found to be inconsequential.
- The prosecution failed to present reports comparing samples taken from other watchmen, withholding critical evidence.
The Court noted that the flawed investigation severely impacted the case, leading to an unjust conviction and death sentence for the accused, who spent nearly 12 years in prison, including six years under the threat of the death penalty.
Read Also: Supreme Court Stays Demolition of Bale Shah Peer Dargah, Orders Status Quo
"We are compelled to hold that flawed and tainted investigation has eventually led to the failure of the prosecution case involving the gruesome rape and murder of a child at the tender age of 3 years and 9 months only," the Court stated.
Case Title: RAMKIRAT MUNILAL GOUD VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ETC.
Appearance:
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Raghenth Basant, Sr. Adv. Ms. Fauzia Shakil, AOR Ms. Aathma Sudhir Kumar, Adv. Ms. Shreya Rastogi, Adv. Ms. Pratiksha Basarkar, Adv. Ms. Kaushitaki Sharma, Adv. Ms. Hima Bhardwaj, Adv.
For Respondent(s) :Ms. Rukhmini Bobde, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Ms. Soumya Priyadarshinee, Adv. Mr. Vinayak Aren, Adv. Mr. Amlaan Kumar, Adv. Mr. Jatin Dhamija, Adv. Mr. Naveen Kumar Bhardwaj, Adv.
