SC Remands POCSO Case To Trial Court For Proper Examination Of Scientific Experts Connected With DNA Report; Sets Aside Death Penalty
The Supreme Court allowed Criminal Appeals, against the Madhya Pradesh High Court's Judgment by which the death penalty awarded to the accused persons was confirmed.
The Supreme Court has remanded a case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) to the Trial Court for a proper examination of the scientific experts.
The Court was hearing Criminal Appeals, challenging the Judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court by which the Appeals of the accused persons were dismissed and the death penalty awarded to them was confirmed.
The three-Judge Bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sanjay Karol, and Justice Sandeep Mehta emphasised, “The instant case involves capital punishment and thus, providing a fair opportunity to the accused to defend himself is absolutely imperative and non-negotiable. The trial in the case at hand was concluded without providing appropriate opportunity of defending to the accused and within and within a period of less than two months from the date of registration of the case, which is reflective of undue haste.”
Senior Advocates Siddharth Aggarwal and Gopal Sankaranarayanan represented the Appellants/Accused while AORs Pashupathi Nath Razdan and Rashmi Nandakumar represented the Respondent/State.
Brief Facts
As per the prosecution case, in 2018, an FIR was lodged by a lady alleging that her granddaughter who was studying in the 3rd standard went missing from the school premises after the classes. Based on this, the Police registered a case for the offence punishable under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the investigation was commenced. On the next day, the Investigating Agency received an information that the child victim had been seen in an injured condition by a person (witness). Thereupon, the police rushed to the spot and took the child victim to the Hospital who was in a serious condition. After her treatment, the child victim narrated the story to the police alleging that on the day of the incident, after her school was over, she was waiting outside when suddenly a person came and forcibly put a sweet (ladoo) in her mouth.
Thereafter, the said person forcibly took her to a secluded spot where he called another person. It was further alleged that she was forcibly undressed and was subjected to forcible sexual assault by the person who gave her sweet, while the other caught hold of her hands. Upon analysing the CCTV footage, certain suspicious movements were noticed and the persons known to the victim and her relatives were shown the CCTV footage and they identified the victim and the Appellants in these footages. Resultantly, the Appellants were apprehended and a Test Identification Parade (TIP) was carried out. The victim correctly identified both of them and the accused persons were subjected to medical examination. Thereafter, the Trial Court convicted them and awarded them capital punishment. The High Court confirmed their conviction and death sentence and being aggrieved, they approached the Apex Court.
Reasoning
The Supreme Court in the above context of the case, observed, “The failure of the trial Court to ensure the deposition of the scientific experts while relying upon the DNA report, has definitely led to the failure of justice thereby, vitiating the trial.”
The Court, therefore, remanded the case to the Trial Court and directed it to summon the scientific experts associated with the preparation and issuance of the DNA report with the entire supporting material.
“These scientific experts shall be summoned and examined as Court witnesses with a proper opportunity of examination to the prosecution and the defence in that order. In case the accused are not represented by a counsel of their choice, a defence counsel having substantial experience in terms of the guidelines laid down by this Court in Anokhilal(supra) (extracted in Para 26 of this judgment) shall be appointed to defend the accused and in the de novo trial”, it further directed.
The Court also ordered that pursuant to the testimony of the scientific experts being recorded, the accused shall be again questioned under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) in context to the fresh evidence and they shall be provided a fair opportunity of leading defence evidence.
“Thereafter, the trial Court shall proceed to re hear the arguments and decide the case afresh as per law. The entire process as directed above, shall be completed within a period of four months from the date of receipt of this order”, it added.
Accordingly, the Apex Court allowed the Appeals and quashed the impugned Judgment.
Cause Title- Irfan Alias Bhayu Mevati v. State of Madhya Pradesh (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 150)
Appearance:
Appellants: Senior Advocates Siddharth Aggarwal, Gopal Sankaranarayanan, AORs Mohd. Irshad Hanif, Reetu Sharma, Advocates Shreya Rastogi, Sakshi Jain, Vishwajeet Bhati, Karan Dhalla, Mangesh Naik, Arvind Kumar Shukla, H.R. Khan, Nihal Ahmad, Tushar Swami, Kunal Yadav, Shantanu Shukla, Ishita Chowdhury, Madhav Gupta, Sabiha Fatma, and Siddharth Sarup.
Respondent: AORs Pashupathi Nath Razdan, Rashmi Nandakumar, and Advocate Yashmita Pandey.
