Rape & Murder Of 15-Year-Old Girl | Uttarakhand High Court Acquits Man Sentenced To Death In 2018

A bench of Chief Justice Ritu Bahri and Justice Alok Kumar Verma pointed out multiple flaws in the prosecution's case and the trial court's records while convicting the accused of murder and rape.

The Court emphasised that the role of the accused (Mohd. Azhar) in the case, as alleged by the prosecution, was "questionable".

The Court noted that given his injuries, it was unlikely that he could have driven the motorcycle, taken the deceased to the site, committed rape, and then, after killing her, brought the body back and hanged it from a tree, making it visible to everyone, including those in the deceased's house.

Given this, stating that the entire version of the prosecution was doubtful, the High Court set aside the judgment and order dated passed by Additional Sessions Judge / FTC / Special Judge (POCSO), Dehradun, convicting him and sentencing him to the death penalty.

The case in brief

As per the prosecution's case, the incident occurred on January 1, 2016, when the victim girl went missing. The next day, her body was found hanging from a tree near Seta Bend in Tyuni, Dehradun.

Her brother (PW-1) claimed that he last saw his sister with the accused, Mohd Azhar, and his accomplice, Nirmal, a Juvenile, leading to their arrest on January 5.

It was the prosecution's case that after raping the minor, the accused had hung her body from a tree to project it as a suicide case.

Based on the testimony of ten prosecution witnesses, the DNA report, statements from the accused, and other evidence presented, the Trial Court convicted the Accused on December 12, 2018, and he was sentenced to death for committing offences under Sections 302 and 376 of IPC, and under Section 4 POCSO Act. Nirmal was acuaitted.

Subsequently, the accused appealed the verdict in the High Court.

High Court's observations

The Court, after examining the evidence put on record by the prosecution as well as the judgment of the trial court, noted that even if the prosecution's version is taken to be true, it was “highly doubtful” that the accused would have brought the dead body on the motorcycle and thereafter hang the body on the tree from where, as per the evidence led the dead body was visible from the house of the deceased.

The Court noted that it would be highly doubtful that anybody who has committed the murder and rape would hang the body from a place where it is visible to everybody.

The Court also noted that the trial court had noted that the witness PW-1 (Brother of the deceased) had testified that accused could not drive a four-wheeler due to injuries received from a past accident and that PW 1 had not driven any vehicle for months because of his injuries.

The Court said this fact cast doubt on the possibility that the accused could have driven a motorcycle. Further, following the juvenile Nirmal's acquittal, the Court noted that the presence of Nirmal at the crime scene was also questioned.

Consequently, the Court observed that PW 2's testimony, which claimed to have seen the victim riding a motorcycle with Nirmal and Azhar, was also doubted, as it was unlikely Azhar could have driven the motorcycle with his injuries.

“Even this version is highly doubtful, if he had committed the rape and murder, he would have left the body there, and especially keeping in view the injuries suffered by him, it is highly doubtful, that he would have brought the dead body on the motorcycle and thereafter hang the body on the tree from where, as per the evidence led the dead body was visible from the house of the deceased, and it would be highly doubtful that anybody who has committed the murder and rape, would hang the body from the place, from where it is visible to everybody,” the division bench noted.

Another fact that the Court took into account was that when the dead body of the victim was recovered, she was wearing leggings, and there was blood. However, there was no semen in the legging, and she was not even wearing any undergarments.

The Court noted that if rape had been committed on her, it was not possible that there would be no semen in the legging when the blood was present.

Hence, the Court concluded that once the DNA report could not be made a basis for conviction, the absence of semen in the leggings when the dead body was recovered made it more doubtful that she had been raped.

The Court also noted that the recovery of the incriminating objects was also doubtful.

Against this backdrop, the death reference was answered accordingly, and the appeal filed by the accused was allowed.

Advocate Manisha Bhandari appeared for the accused

Case title - State of Uttarakhand vs. Mohd. Azhar @ Antee [CRIMINAL REFERENCE No.06 OF 2018]

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (UTT) 15

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment