C. Perumal vs Rajasekaran & Ors

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

intervening the 28 and 29th of January, 1999. The trial

court in its judgment dated 31st 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

put on record, he has passed away on the 30th 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.