Ghaziabad Court Hands Down Double Life Sentence in Heinous Child Rape and Murder Case
A special Pocso court in Ghaziabad has delivered a stern verdict, sentencing a man from Muradnagar to two life terms for the brutal rape and murder of his five-year-old niece. Additional Sessions Judge Neeraj Gautam presided over the case, which has shocked the local community.
Details of the Court's Ruling
The court imposed the first life term under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for murder. It awarded the second life term under Section 5/6 of the Pocso Act for aggravated penetrative sexual assault. This second sentence will remain in effect until the end of the convict's natural life.
Judge Gautam also sentenced the accused under Section 201 for causing the disappearance of evidence and Section 377 for carnal intercourse against the order of nature. The court declined to classify the crime under the rarest of rare category, thus avoiding capital punishment.
Instead, it imposed a fine of Rs 1.3 lakh. The court directed that Rs 1 lakh from this amount should go to the parents of the child as compensation.
Background and Investigation of the Case
The tragic incident dates back to April 2019. The girl went missing on the night of April 7. Her father filed an FIR with Muradnagar police the next day. Authorities discovered the child's body in a nearby field on the morning of April 8.
Medical findings prompted police to include Sections 376A and 377 of the IPC alongside Sections 302 and 201. Investigators identified the accused from CCTV footage and arrested him the following day.
Police filed a chargesheet on June 1, 2019. The court framed charges on March 13, 2020.
Court Proceedings and Witness Testimonies
The prosecution presented seven witnesses during the trial. These included the plaintiff, who was the minor's father. One of her uncles testified as an eyewitness. The doctor who conducted the post-mortem examination and investigators in the case also gave evidence.
The defence produced four witnesses. This group included the minor's mother, her grandfather, and two local residents.
Special Public Prosecutor Utkarsha Vats argued that most defence witnesses were originally listed as prosecution witnesses in the chargesheet. However, the prosecution did not examine them due to their attempts to protect the accused during the trial and their vested interests.
Key Arguments and the Court's Observations
The defence contended that the prosecution failed to prove the CCTV footage under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. The court, however, noted the eyewitness account. This witness saw the accused going into the forest with the girl before the incident occurred.
Judge Gautam gave credence to the testimony of the minor's uncle, who confirmed seeing the child with the accused.
After hearing both sides, the court concluded that the prosecution succeeded in proving the fundamental elements of the alleged offence. It stated that the presumption under Sections 29 and 30 of the Pocso Act is applicable against the accused.
Final Judgment and Legal Implications
The court declared that the prosecution proved the offence of aggravated penetrative sexual assault beyond a reasonable doubt. It emphasized that the presumption under the Pocso Act applies in this case.
Judge Gautam stated, "The prosecution successfully proved that the accused committed the crimes of murder, rape, unnatural sexual acts, destruction of evidence, and aggravated sexual assault."
This verdict underscores the judiciary's commitment to delivering justice in cases involving crimes against children. It highlights the rigorous legal process followed to ensure a fair trial while addressing the severity of the offences.
