DARGA RAM @ GUNGA versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN

Citation: [2015] 1 S.C.R. 350 · Decided: 08-01-2015 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: T.S. THAKUR · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
(2015] 1 S.C.R. 350 
DARGA RAM @ GUNGA 
v. 
STATE OF RAJASTHAN 
(Criminal Appeal No. 513 of 2008) 
JANUARY 8, 2015 
[T.S. THAKUR AND R. BANUMATHI, JJ.] 
Penal Code, 1860 - ss. 302 and 376 - Murder and rape 
of minor girl aged 7 years - Conviction by courts below- Held: 
The circumstances of the case form a complete chain and 
lead to an irresistible conclusion that the accused was 
responsible for rape and murder - Conviction affirmed. 
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 
0 
2000 -
s. 12(3)(b) - Conviction for rape and murder - In 
appeal to Supreme Court, plea of Juvenility - Constitution of 
Medical Board - The Board determined his age in the range 
of 30 to 36 years and took 33 years as his average age - In 
view of the opinion of the Medical Board, the accused was a 
E juvenile as on the date of occurrence -
Sentence of life 
imprisonment set aside. 
Partly allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1. The prosecution has clearly established 
F 
that a "Jaagran" was arranged by the complainant on the 
offside of village near the well in which nearly 50 people 
participated including the deceased child.The deceased 
had gone out to sleep after dinner around mid night. 
The appellant was also participating in the "Jaagran" and 
G 
was seen sitting along with some of the prosecution 
witnesses. Deceased was found missing in the morning 
but upon search her dead body was noticed at some 
distance in the village in a naked condition with injuries 
on her private parts and her head smashed with a stone 
H 
350 
DARGA RAM @ GUNGA v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN 351 
lying nearby. The appellant made a disclosure statement A 
leading to the recovery of his blood stained clothes. The 
blood was found to be of human origin and belonging to 
group 'A" which also was the blood group of the 
deceased. The appellant on medical examination was 
found to have several injuries on his body including B 
injury on his penis. The injuries found on the person of 
. the appellant were said to be 3 to 5 days old. The appellant 
did not offer any explanation for the injuries on his body. 
These circumstances form a complete chain and lead to 
an irresistible conclusion that the appellant was c 
responsible for the offence of rape and murder of the 
deceased. The conviction of the appellant for offences 
under Section 302 and 376 of IPC is affirmed. [para 10-
11 and 17] [357-A-H; 358-A; 362-G] 
2. The appellant's age as per the Medical Board, has D 
been placed in the range of 30 to 36 years. The Board 
appears to have taken the average of two extremitees 
and concluded that the appellant's age on the date of the 
examination was about 33 years. The general rule about 
age determination is that the age as determined can vary E 
plus minus two years but the Board has in the present 
case spread over a period of six years and taken a mean 
to fix the age of the appellant at 33 years. However, in 
view of the fact that the age was determined by a Medical 
Board 
comprising 
Professors 
of 
Anatomy, 
F 
Radiodiagnosis and Forensic Medicine, the court is 
going by the age estimate given by the Medical Board 
and declares the appellant to be a juvenile as on the date 
of the occurrence. Even if the age of the appellant was 
determined by the upper extremity limit i.e. 36 years the G 
same would have been subject to variation of plus minus 
2 years meaning thereby that he could as weli be 34 years 
on the date of the examination. Taking his age as 34 years 
on the date of the examination, he would have been 18 
years, 2 months and 7 days on the date of the occurrence, 
H 
352 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2015] 1 S.C.R. 
A 
but such an estimate would be only an estimate and the 
appellant may be entitled to additional benefit of one year 
in terms of lowering his age by one year in terms of Rule 
12 (3)(b) which would then bring him to be 17 years and 
2 months old, therefore, a juvenile. The sentence awarded 
B 
to the accused shall stand set aside. [paras 13, 15, 16 and 
17) [360-A-D; 362-A-D; 361-D-E) 
CRIMINAL AP PELLA TE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal 
No. 513 of 2008. 
C 
From the Judgment & Order dated 20.08.2007of the High 
D 
Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Bench at Jodhpur in D.B. 
Criminal Jail Appeal No. 604 of 2004. 
Vijay Panjwani (A.C.) for the Appellant. 
Milind Kumar for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
T.S. THAKUR, J. 1. The appellant was tried and 
E 
convicted for offences punishable und

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.