PAPPU versus THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

PAPPU versus THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

The conviction was upheld: the prosecution established a complete chain of circumstantial evidence (victim last seen with appellant; discovery of dead body and clothing at appellant's instance; corroborative post-mortem and forensic findings) and the appellant failed to discharge the burden under Section 106 Evidence Act and to rebut the presumption under Section 29 POCSO. However, while the crime disclosed aggravating circumstances, the case did not fall within 'rarest of rare' because the appellant had no antecedents, came from a poor socio-economic background, had family dependents and unblemished jail conduct; accordingly the death sentence under Section 302 IPC was commuted to life...

Parties
Appellant: Pappu; Respondent: The State of Uttar Pradesh
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
09 February 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal by Special Leave Under Article 136 of the Constitution Challenging Conviction and Sentence / Judgment on Appeal and Confirmation/commutation of Sentence (conviction Upheld; Death Sentence Reviewed)
Outcome
Appeal partly allowed; convictions under Sections 376, 302, 201 IPC and Sections 5/6 POCSO upheld; death sentence under Section 302 IPC commuted to life imprisonment with stipulation of 30 years actual imprisonment before any premature release/remission; other sentences and fines confirmed and to run concurrently
Legal Topics
Rape of a Child, Murder, Concealment of Dead Body, Circumstantial Evidence, Child Witness Credibility, Last Seen Evidence, Section 29 POCSO Presumption, Section 106 Evidence Act Burden, Discovery on Accused's Information (section 27 Evidence Act), Sentencing; Death Penalty; Rarest of Rare Test, Commutation; Life Imprisonment With Minimum Term
Criminal Law Evidence Constitutional Law Penology Rape of a Child Murder Concealment of Dead Body Circumstantial Evidence +7 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 41 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pappu

Appellant

The State of Uttar Pradesh

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal by Special Leave Under Article 136 of the Constitution Challenging Conviction and Sentence / Judgment on Appeal and Confirmation/commutation of Sentence (conviction Upheld; Death Sentence Reviewed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt on circumstantial evidence (last seen together, discovery at accused's instance, medical and forensic evidence)
  2. 2 Whether the discovery of the dead body at the accused's instance and his failure to explain his whereabouts shifts any burden under Section 106 Evidence Act and engages Section 29 POCSO
  3. 3 Whether procedural irregularities (timing/ante-timing of FIR, arrest/recovery memos, storage/forensic procedures) vitiate the prosecution case

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction was upheld: the prosecution established a complete chain of circumstantial evidence (victim last seen with appellant; discovery of dead body and clothing at appellant's instance; corroborative post-mortem and forensic findings) and the appellant failed to discharge the burden under Section 106 Evidence Act and to rebut the presumption under Section 29 POCSO. However, while the crime disclosed aggravating circumstances, the case did not fall within 'rarest of rare' because the appellant had no antecedents, came from a poor socio-economic background, had family dependents and unblemished jail conduct; accordingly the death sentence under Section 302 IPC was commuted to life...

Court Disposition

Appeal partly allowed; convictions under Sections 376, 302, 201 IPC and Sections 5/6 POCSO upheld; death sentence under Section 302 IPC commuted to life imprisonment with stipulation of 30 years actual imprisonment before any premature release/remission; other sentences and fines confirmed and to run concurrently

Orders

  • Convictions of the appellant under Sections 376, 302, 201 IPC and Sections 5/6 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 are upheld
  • Death sentence awarded under Section 302 IPC is commuted to imprisonment for life with stipulation that the appellant shall not be entitled to premature release or remission before undergoing actual imprisonment for a period of 30 years