'Human/Child Sacrifice Shocks Conscience Of Civilized Society': Allahabad HC Upholds Life Term For Man Who Killed 1-Yr Old Boy

With these observations, a bench of Justice Rajiv Gupta and Justice Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi also upheld the life sentence imposed on the 47-year-old man and dismissed his appeal against conviction.

The case in brief

As per the prosecution's case, on April 12, 2023, informant Amerika Prasad, accompanied by his wife Gangotri, daughter Kusum, son-in-law Ram Dular, and their 11-month-old infant (deceased victim), were attending a fair seeking treatment for Gangotri's mental illness through exorcism.

There was a 'Bramh Baba Sthan', where a fair was held every year during Navratra, in which exorcism was practised.

While they were having their lunch, the appellant-accused, dressed only in a vest and underwear and wielding a knife, came there, picked up the child, moved about 10 paces away, and callously began stabbing the child.

Despite efforts from Prasad, his son-in-law, and other family members to rescue the child, the assailant-appellant managed to escape. Prasad attempted to rush the injured child for medical treatment, but tragically, Rameshwar succumbed to his injuries on the way.

An FIR was lodged in the matter and on April 14, 2003, based on the information given by the informer, the appellant was arrested and the alleged knife was also recovered.

After appreciating the evidence on record, the trial court convicted the accused by noting that the prosecution had successfully established its case against the appellant by relying upon the testimony of all the prosecution witnesses, whose presence at the place and time of the incident had been cogently and established.

Challenging his convection, the accused-appellant moved the HC wherein it was argued that the incident did not occur as described by the prosecution. Instead, it was posited that an unidentified individual was responsible for the deceased's death, and the appellant was wrongly accused through fabricated eyewitness testimonies.

Furthermore, it was contended that the item recovered during the appellant's pointing out was identified as a pointed weapon called 'summi,' not a knife. Therefore, it was argued that the injuries observed on the deceased could not have been inflicted by this 'summi.'

On the other hand, the AGA appearing for the state submitted that in the instant case, the eyewitnesses cogently and unerringly proved the appellant's participation and the defence had not been able to elicit any doubt about the credibility of the said witnesses.

High Courts observations

Against this backdrop, examining the facts of the case as well as the judgment of the trial court, the High Court noted that the testimony of all the four eye-witnesses, except for minor contradictions, did not suffer from any shortcomings to doubt their credibility.

Further, noting that in the present case, all the eye-witnesses P.W.1, P.W.3 and P.W.4 are rustic witnesses, the Court stressed that the basic principle of appreciation of evidence of a rustic witness who is not educated and comes from a poor stratum of society is that the evidence of such a witness should be appreciated as a whole.

Further, looking at the testimony of P.W.1, P.W.3 and P.W.4, the Court observed that they all were the eyewitnesses, present at the time and place of the incident and there was no reason for them to spare the actual assailant and falsely implicate the appellant in the instant case.

Considering the entire aspect of the matter and taking a holistic view of the circumstances in which the present offence has been committed, the Court upheld the judgment and order passed by the trial court.

Moreover, the Court added that the instant case was a classic case of blind faith and unfortunate realities of our times still prevalent in remote areas.

“Human/child sacrifice has been practiced on a number of different occasions and in many different cultures. Human/child sacrifice is typically intended to bring good fortune and to appease the Gods, which in our opinion, shocks the conscience of the civilized society and is to be condemned by one and all, to curb such social evils,” the Court remarked.

With this, dismissing the appeal of the convict, the Court upheld his conviction.

Case title - Rajendra Prasad Gaur vs. State of U.P. 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 210 [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 79 of 2005]

Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 210

Click Here To Read/Download order