Madhya Pradesh high court
BHOPAL: The Gwalior bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court has upheld the life imprisonment awarded to six men convicted in the 2013 gang rape and dacoity case involving two foreign nationals in Datia district, observing that the prosecution had proved its case “beyond reasonable doubt” through consistent testimony, medical evidence and conclusive DNA findings.A division bench comprising Justice Anand Pathak and Justice Pushpendra Yadav dismissed Criminal Appeal Nos. 832/2013 and 833/2013, filed by the convicts challenging the July 20, 2013 verdict of the Special Judge (Dacoity), Datia.As per the prosecution, the incident occurred on March 15, 2013, when the foreign nationals, who were touring India on bicycles, camped in a forested area near village Jharia in Datia district.
Around 8 pm, five to seven men allegedly approached the tent, demanded money and assaulted the couple.The High Court noted that while some accused restrained the husband, four of them raped the woman in turns. The assailants also looted a laptop, battery, earphones, cellphone, headlamp and cash before fleeing.The couple later reached the Datia-Seondha highway and, with assistance from passersby, approached Civil Line police station.
The FIR was registered promptly with the help of a translator — a factor the court said ruled out the possibility of deliberation or false implication.“Promptness in lodging the FIR shows there was no time for manipulation and indicates that the allegation was not an afterthought,” the bench observed.The court relied heavily on the testimony of the survivor and her husband, noting that her account of the sequence of events remained consistent and unshaken during cross-examination.While the defence argued that the survivor had stated she could not clearly see the faces of the accused due to darkness and that only four persons had raped her, the court rejected this contention. It held that in cases of gangrape, participation and common intention are sufficient to attract liability, even if a completed act of rape by each accused is not individually proved.Citing Supreme Court precedents, the bench observed that where multiple persons act in concert, each is liable for the offence of gangrape.The survivor was medically examined by a team of doctors at Gwalior. The court referred to the testimony of the examining doctor, who stated that injuries found on the survivor were consistent with forcible penetration and could not have been caused by cycling or accidental fall, as suggested by the defence.DNA profiling conducted at the Forensic Science Laboratory, Sagar, matched the biological samples of five accused — Ramprok, Vishnu, Bhoota alias Ghanshyam, Brijesh alias Gaja and Nitin — with samples collected from the survivor.
The bench described the DNA evidence as “implicative and corroborative” of the prosecution case.Although the DNA of Rishi alias Baba did not match, the court held that recovery of stolen property from his possession, along with identification by the victims, established his role in the crime. “In gangrape, proof of completed act of rape by each accused is not required,” the court reiterated.The High Court also upheld the findings relating to seizure of stolen property and a firearm.
A laptop and cellphone were recovered at the instance of the accused, and fingerprint examination revealed matching prints of Ramprok, Brijesh and Bhoota on the looted articles.In Ramprok’s case, a .315 bore gun and live cartridge were recovered based on his disclosure statement. The court affirmed his conviction under Sections 25(1)(1B)(a) and 27 of the Arms Act, observing that the weapon was used during the robbery.The bench further noted that voter identity cards of two accused were seized from the spot and that the chain of custody of forensic samples was not shaken during cross-examination.The defence argued that there were contradictions in witness statements, procedural lapses in obtaining fingerprint samples, and that the accused belonged to poor families and had already spent nearly 13 years in custody. It sought acquittal or, alternatively, a lenient view.Rejecting these submissions, the High Court observed that police testimony cannot be discarded merely because it comes from official witnesses, if found reliable. It added that the accused had failed to explain the incriminating evidence against them in their statements under Section 313 CrPC.Describing rape as “an attack not only on the body but also on the spirit and dignity of a woman,” the bench said the offence was “all the more heinous” as it was committed against a woman tourist who had come to explore the cultural and historical heritage of the country.“In the considered opinion of this court, the prosecution has proved the commission of the offence of rape, dacoity and offences under the Arms Act beyond reasonable doubt. The appellants shall have to suffer life imprisonment,” the judgment stated.With these observations, the High Court dismissed both appeals and directed that the convicts, who have been in judicial custody since March 17, 2013, shall continue to serve the remaining part of their life sentences. Copies of the judgment have been sent to the trial court and jail authorities for necessary compliance.
