E-Paper
HC acquits 4 on death row for rape, murder of two minor sisters in Sonepat
On the morning of August 6, the girls were taken to a Delhi hospital, where younger one was declared brought dead and the elder one died while undergoing treatment in the hospital
Prefer HTon Google
The Punjab and Haryana high court has acquitted four persons who were awarded the death sentence by a Sonepat court in the rape and murder case of two minor migrant girls in the Kundli area in Sonepat district in August 2021.
The allegations were that the girls, aged 15 and 13, were sleeping in a room with their mother on the intervening night of August 5-6, 2021, when the accused—Arun, Phool Chand, Dukhan, and Ram Suhag, who were also migrant labourers living next to the victims’ rented accommodation—entered the room, raped the girls, and forcefully administered poison to them, while the woman was gagged and threatened.
At the time of the crime, the two eldest brothers of the victim girls were sleeping on the roof. In all, the woman had five children. Both the victims and the accused are from different parts of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh.
On the morning of August 6, the girls were taken to a Delhi hospital, where younger one was declared brought dead and the elder one died while undergoing treatment in the hospital. Initially, the mother of the victims had told the doctors that the girls died of snakebite.
But on August 9, she complained to the police naming all the accused as the perpetrators of the rape and murder, and based on that complaint, a criminal case was registered. It was on November 24, 2023, a trial court had awarded death sentence to all the four accused. However, the HC order came on their appeals and death penalty reference sent by the trial court for confirmation.
Victims’ mother turns hostile
Initially, the mother had named the accused and a complaint was registered. However, in the statement given to a judicial magistrate on August 10, she did not name any of them.
During the trial, she was declared a hostile witness. She did not support the prosecution’s case and denied everything, including the statement she had made to the magistrate. When the trial court questioned her regarding her denial—specifically about making the statement and affixing her thumb impression—she maintained her denial. Later, a fingerprint expert opined that the thumb impression on the recorded statement belonged to her (the mother).
The HC also found that the genetic material of none of the accused persons matched the vaginal swabs of the minor victims. Furthermore, the medical report did not find any injuries on the lips or mouths of the victims to prima facie demonstrate that the poison was forcibly administered. The victims’ brothers, who were sleeping on the roof of the house, also did not support the police version.
‘Picture hazy how four convicted’
The HC observed that after careful analysis of the entire evidence and the record, the picture that emerges is “hazy as to how these four persons were implicated, much worse given the death sentence”.
“An analysis of the entire evidence not only creates doubt about the involvement of any of the accused but also indicates the absence of scientific evidence against them. Given the above, although the prosecution is able to establish the commission of the offence of rape against both the victims, it has failed to connect any of the accused as the perpetrator of rape,” the bench of justice Anoop Chitkara and justice RC Dimri observed while acquitting all the four accused.
The court said that the mother, who was declared hostile, her version is corroborated by forensic reports, which show that the DNA of any of the accused could not be accounted for.
“Why would a mother who lost her two minor daughters, and why would two adult brothers who lost their two minor sisters, spare the real culprits? Ordinarily, these closest relatives, in utter grief, would be in a vengeful mood and thus support the prosecution to ensure the conviction of the real culprits and to seek the maximum punishment. All of them stating that the accused who were shown to them were not involved and would also create a possibility that the real culprits were never arraigned as accused, cannot be ruled out,” the court further recorded, adding that if the accused wanted to kill the girls to destroy evidence of rape, there was no reason for them to spare their mother.
The court also took note of the statements of the brothers, aged 22 and 18, who were sleeping on the roof and had deposed, refusing to blame any of the four accused. “...the victims’ brothers were not children but were 22 and 18 years of age; still, they did not support the prosecution’s case and were declared hostile witnesses. Even when the public prosecutor put leading questions to them, they did not budge,” the court recorded.
