NDLI: Prakash Nishad @ Kewat Zinak Nishad Vs. State of Maharashtra

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Case of circumstantial evidence Crime involving severe punishments Evidence imprisonment for life or the sentence of death
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Evidence – Case of circumstantial evidence – Six year oldchild was sexually assaulted, killed and thrown her into a ‘nala’ –Appellant was arrested on the basis of suspicion – Charged forhaving committed offences punishable u/s.376, 377, 302 and 201,IPC –Concurrently convicted, death sentence imposed for the chargeu/s.302 and sentenced for other offences – Correctness of – Held:There were yawning gaps in the chain of circumstances rendering itfar from being established, pointing to the guilt of the appellant –Several irregularities and illegalities on the part of the agenciesexamining the case – Charges levied on the appellant not proved –Orders of the courts below set aside – Penal Code, 1860 – ss.376,377, 302 and 201 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.53A –Criminal Law.Criminal Law– Whether non-recording of the disclosurestatement of the appellant in the language in which it was madeand recording it in a language totally unknown to the appellant,contents whereof were also not read over and explained to him, canbe said to have caused any prejudice to the cause of justice? –Held: Yes – Appellant did not know how to read and write in Marathi– Perusal of the alleged disclosure statement reveals that it wasrecorded in Marathi and the Investigating officer not having readover or explained contents thereof to the appellant in his vernacularlanguage i.e Hindi – It was important for the appellant to understandthe case of the prosecution against him – There is nothing on recordto show that it was not practicable to record evidence of theappellant as well as others, whose vernacular was not Marathi, butHindi – Statutory safeguards in reference to language not havingbeen complied with caused prejudice to the appellant– Code ofCriminal Procedure, 1973. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.53A – Non-compliancewith – Held:In the present case, none of the witness deposed thefact of medical examination of the appellant as stipulated u/s.53A –No reason was given for having decided that there was no need tocomply with the provisions of s.53A– Samples of the blood and semenof the appellant were sent for forensic analysis – However, there isnothing on record to establish as to who took such samples, onwhat date, on how many occasions and why were they not sent allat once – None of the police officials testified to the formalities ofkeeping the samples safe and secure being complied with – There isonly one document (Ext.79) on record, indicating the appellant tohave been medically examined – But even this document does notreveal sample of the body part being drawn – In any event, thedoctor who conducted such examination did not testify thecorrectness of the contents thereof – Also, the document itself isuninspiring confidence having certain interpolations therein –Additionally, the document does not fall true to the statutoryrequirements imposed u/s.53A – This is a glaring lapse in theinvestigation of this crime, for a six year-old child was sexuallyassaulted on both of the private parts – Medical examination of theappellant would have resulted into ascertainment of such assault –Samples when collected are to be sent to the concerned laboratoryas soon as possible – Delay in sending the samples is unexplained– “Without any delay” and “chain of custody” aspects which areindispensable to the vitality of such evidence, were not compliedwith – Thus, in the instant case, the DNA Report cannot be the basisto send appellant to the gallows – Maharashtra Police Manual –Appendix XXIV – Evidence – Criminal Law.Evidence – Value of DNA evidence – Discussed.Criminal Law – Crime involving severe punishments such asimprisonment for life or the sentence of death – Role andresponsibilities of the investigating authorities, not adhered to –Deprecated.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol
Neutral Citation	2023 INSC 561
Petitioner	Prakash Nishad @ Kewat Zinak Nishad
Respondent	State Of Maharashtra
SCR	[2023] 8 S.C.R. 152
Judgement Date	2023-05-19
Case Number	1636

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Prakash Nishad @ Kewat Zinak Nishad Vs. State of Maharashtra

Please Log-in to view this content

Rameshbhai Chandubhai Rathod Vs. The State of Gujarat

Sunil Dutt Sharma Vs. State (govt. of Nct of Delhi)

Gurmeet Singh Vs. State of U.p.

Vijay Shankar Vs. State of Haryana

Ravishankar @ Baba Vishwakarma Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh

Chawla and Another Vs. State of Haryana

Swamy Shraddananda @ Murali Manohar Mishra Vs. State of Karnataka

Prakash Vs. State of Rajasthan

Digambar Vs. The State of Maharashtra

Prakash Nishad @ Kewat Zinak Nishad Vs. State of Maharashtra

Prakash Nishad @ Kewat Zinak Nishad Vs. State of Maharashtra

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Rameshbhai Chandubhai Rathod Vs. The State of Gujarat

Sunil Dutt Sharma Vs. State (govt. of Nct of Delhi)

Gurmeet Singh Vs. State of U.p.

Vijay Shankar Vs. State of Haryana

Ravishankar @ Baba Vishwakarma Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh

Chawla and Another Vs. State of Haryana

Swamy Shraddananda @ Murali Manohar Mishra Vs. State of Karnataka

Prakash Vs. State of Rajasthan

Digambar Vs. The State of Maharashtra

Prakash Nishad @ Kewat Zinak Nishad Vs. State of Maharashtra