上一步 16 / 47 下一步

30. After some time, PW1 admitted during further cross examination the following: “Zalim Khan had come at the spot. Zalim Khan had told to get lodged the FIR against Chotkau.” 31. In contradistinction to what PW1 said, PW3 stated that the “information had been given to police station over telephone, then police man had come”. During crossexamination also PW3 stated that police reached the spot upon getting a phone call and that he did not know who made the call. 32. PW4, the Head Constable said in Chief Examination: “On 08.03.2012, I was posted as H.C. at Police StationIkauna, DistrictShrawasti. On that day a written Hindi Tahrir had been submitted by complainant of the case Shri Kishun Bahadur s/o Chintaram, resident of Semgarha, Police StationIkauna, District Shrawasti.” During crossexamination PW4 reiterated: “The complainant of the case had given me a written application. The complainant of the case had given the Tehrir on 08.03.2012 at 20:10 hrs..”. 16

選擇目標文字3

● ● ●

Chotkau

案件摘要

司法管轄

印度

國籍

印度人

案件標題: Chotkau v. State of UP

作案時年齡: 23

作案時年齡組: 成年人 (18至59歲)

性别: 男性

犯罪時的宗教信仰: 印度教

弱勢 / 邊緣群體身份

社會經濟地位

司法轄區 - 地理定位

緯度: 20.5937

經度: 78.9629

司法轄區 - 地理定位 (已連結案件摘要): 印度

瑞慈合作機構

The Square Circle Clinic (印度)

該國最新死刑狀態

保留死刑

案件現狀: 已結案: 無罪釋放

判處死刑年份: 2010s: 2014

涉嫌侵犯的權利

公正審判與正當程序權利: 公正調查與信息披露
公正審判與正當程序權利: 在各階段獲得充分法律代理的權利
公正審判與正當程序權利: 由公正、獨立的法庭公正聽審的權利

死刑所涉罪名的性質

性暴力: Rape
謀殺: 一名受害者

案件背景 (最多300字)

The Appellant was charged for the commission of the offences of raping the minor girl and murdering her. During questioning under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), the Appellant denied the charges and claimed that he had been falsely implicated in the case. Holding that the guilt of the Appellant stood established beyond reasonable doubt by circumstantial evidence and also holding that it is one of the rarest of rare cases where a six year old girl had been raped and murdered, the Sessions Court and High Court convicted the Appellant and gave death penalty.

The key circumstances against the Appellant were as follows:

PWs 1 and 2 had observed the victim being taken towards the sugarcane field.
PW-3 had witnessed the Appellant taking the victim from her house and also leaving the sugarcane field half an hour later.
When a search was conducted for the missing girl, her dead body was discovered in the sugarcane field, and the Appellant was found to be absconding.

The Court while acquitting the Appellant held:

In the evidence tendered by PWs 1 to 3, on crucial aspects such as, (i) the mode of Lodging of the FIR; (ii) the place where the dead body was first seen by the police, persons took the body from the place of occurrence and where it was taken to; (iii) the Place, Date and Time of conduct of the inquest; and (iv) the clothes on the body of the victim, recovered by the police. These contradictions make the evidence of PWs 1 to 3 completely untrustworthy. Unfortunately, the Sessions Court as well as the High Court have trivialized these major contradictions to hold that the chain of circumstances have been established unbroken.
In cases where the victim of rape is alive and is in a position to testify in court, it may be possible for the prosecution to take a chance by not medically examining the Accused. But in cases where the victim is dead and the offence is sought to be established only by circumstantial evidence, medical evidence assumes great importance. The failure of the prosecution to produce such evidence, despite there being no obstacle from the Accused or anyone, will certainly create a gaping hole in the case of the prosecution and give rise to a serious doubt on the case of the prosecution. The failure of the prosecution in this case to subject the Appellant to medical examination is certainly fatal to the prosecution case especially when the ocular evidence is found to be not trustworthy.
Their failure to obtain the report of the Forensic Sciences Laboratory on the blood/semen stain on the salwar worn by the victim, compounds the failure of the prosecution.
In fact this is a case where the Appellant is so poor that he could not afford to engage a lawyer even in the Sessions Court. After his repeated requests to the Court of District and Sessions Judge, the service of an advocate was provided as amicus. In cases of such nature, the responsibility of the Court becomes more onerous.
By not conducting the investigation properly, the prosecution has done injustice to the family of the victim. By fixing culpability upon the Appellant without any shred of evidence which will stand the scrutiny, the prosecution has done injustice to the Appellant. Court cannot make someone, a victim of injustice, to compensate for the injustice to the victim of a crime.

The Judgment was selected because it showed how poor investigation led to injustice for both the victim and the accused.

辯方意見 (最多200字)

Material Contradiction in PW 1-3 testimonies wrt (i) the mode of Lodging of the FIR; (ii) the place where the dead body was first seen by the police, persons took the body from the place of occurrence and where it was taken to; (iii) the Place, Date and Time of conduct of the inquest; and (iv) the clothes on the body of the victim, recovered by the police.
Unexplained FIR Delay: There was a five-day delay in forwarding the FIR to the jurisdictional Court without explanation.
Insufficient Last Seen Theory Evidence: The evidence supporting the last seen theory was inadequate to convict the Appellant. 4.Lack of Forensic/Medical Evidence: The Investigating Officer did not produce any forensic or medical evidence, reflecting a serious lapse in duty.
Non-compliance with Section 313: the defense challenged the manner in which the Accused's statement was recorded under Section 313 of the Code, arguing that the Court had failed to fully comply with the requirements of Section 313(1)(b). They contended that this non-compliance undermined the procedural fairness of the trial and impacted the overall integrity of the judicial process, thereby affecting the credibility of the prosecution's case and the Accused’s right to a fair trial.

判决摘要 (最多200字): The Judgment was selected the Supreme Court emphasized that an individual cannot be made a victim of injustice to compensate for the injustice suffered by the victim of a crime. The case also highlighted that the Appellant was so poor he could not afford to hire a lawyer in the Sessions Court, which underscores the Court’s responsibility to ensure fair treatment and proper legal representation for all, regardless of their financial situation.

獲得法律代理的情況

上訴階段: 公益律師
第二次上訴階段: 公益律師
審判階段: 國家法律援助
偵查前階段: 未知

使用的特別程序

法庭之友 / “觀察簡報”

案件摘要錄入狀態: 進行中

案件材料語言

英語

主要文檔

Chotkkau v. State of UP
English
下載查看

Death Penalty Defence - Asia

選擇目標文字3

Chotkau

主要文檔

Notifications