Morung Express news
Kohima | May 31
The Gauhati High Court, Kohima bench, has overturned a rape and murder conviction dating back to May 2004. A division bench comprising Justice Sanjay Kumar Medhi and Justice Budi Habung made the judgment, citing insufficient evidence, nullified the previous ruling of the lower trial court.
The matter pertains to an alleged rape and murder of a woman in Phek district in 2003. The case was registered at the Phek Police Station under section 302 and 376 IPC.
In their deliberation, the justices highlighted the prosecution's failure to conclusively establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Despite the accused having spent approximately 21 years in custody/prison without bail, the court found the evidence presented by the prosecution lacking. A prior attempt for early release in 2019 was rejected on the ground that convictions under section 376 IPC are not entitled to premature release.
During the second appeal in 2022, it was revealed that substantial trial court records, apart from a few documents like the FIR and the purported confession of the accused, were untraceable. The absence of crucial evidence raised doubts about the conviction's validity. Additionally, the court questioned the sole reliance on a confessional statement of the accused.
The judges noted the absence of key procedures such as site visit, sketch mapping and recovery of evidence. No efforts were made to obtain forensic evidence like blood samples or expert opinions. The court highlighted the lack of post-mortem examination on the deceased, a fundamental procedure in cases of this nature.
“It is discernible from the available records that right from the beginning, the investigation of the case was not properly and adequately done,” the judges remarked.
Furthermore, the court raised concerns about the authenticity of evidence presented, including a 2-feet long “naga dao” produced by a witness without adequate verification or forensic analysis. These lapses cast doubt on the prosecution's narrative, failing to establish a clear link between the accused and the crime.
In its ruling, the court reiterated the burden of proof on the prosecution. In this instance, the prosecution's case fell short, prompting the court to overturn the conviction and ordering the release of the convicted man (appellant), “If not required in any other case.”
The court also commended the appellant's legal aid counsel, Sentiyanger. “He is entitled to the legal aid fee as prescribed,” the judgment said.
