was shouting that the accused person(s) had committed rape
on her and set her on fire. The statement of the deceased
recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (for short, Cr.P.C.) by Smt. Suchita
Srivastava, Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sagar (PW-23)
also supports the prosecution case. The Dehat Nalishi (Ex.
P/28) recorded by Sub Inspector, Anjana Parmaar (PW-16)
also narrates the same factual position.
9.
In that view of the matter, we do not find that there is
any error in the concurrent orders of the Trial Judge and the
High
Court
convicting
the
appellant
for
the
offences
punishable under Sections 450, 376(2)(i), 376D, 376A and
302 read with 34 of the IPC and Section 5(g)/6 of the POCSO.
10. The question that now requires to be considered is as to
whether the present case would fall in the category of ‘rarest
of rare case’ so as to confirm the death penalty or the
sentence could be commuted.
11. We have perused the psychological assessment of the
present appellant as conducted by the Department of
Psychiatry,
NSCB
Medical
College,
Jabalpur,
Madhya
Pradesh so also the report of the Senior Probation and
6
選擇目標文字3
連接到段落
連接到實體
取消高亮顯示
新增到目錄