NDLI: Mohd. Firoz Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	376(2)(m) 1860 – Ss. 302 2012 Penal Code 376A – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 376(2)(i) 366 363
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3 Referred Case 4 Referred Case 5 Referred Case 6 Referred Case 7
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Penal Code, 1860 – Ss. 302, 376(2)(i), 376(2)(m), 363, 366, 376A – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) – ss. 5 (i), 5 (m), 6 – Evidence Act, 1872 – s. 106 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – ss. 304, 313 – Rape and sexual assault on the young child-victim – Appellant-accused along with one another accused person was convicted for death sentence and life imprisonment, respectively, by the trial court for the offences u/ ss. 302, 376(2)(i), 376(2)(m), 363, 366 IPC r/w. s. 5(i) r/w. s. 6 and s.5(m) r/w. s. 6 of the POCSO Act – High Court, while dismissing the appeal, affirmed the order of conviction by trial court regarding the appellant herein but acquitted the other accused person – Appellant has, thus, preferred the present appeal – Whether the trial had been conducted in a fair manner by following the due procedure and the prosecution had proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt since the case was based on circumstantial evidence- Whether the prosecution had adequately proved the circumstance with regard to the theory of “last seen together” – Whether the prosecution had sufficiently proved the “proximity of time” i.e. ‘the time gap between the victim being lastly seen with the appellant-accused and the time when she was found injured and unconscious in the field’ – Held: In the instant case, neither any explanation was offered by the appellant in his further statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. nor any concrete defence was taken during the course of the cross-examination of the witnesses – Conduct of the accused in absconding away also was a circumstance duly proved by the prosecution against him – Time gap between the victim being lastly seen with the appellant-accused and the time when she was found injured and unconscious in the field was hardly 12 hours – The said injuries had resulted into her death – Prosecution had proved the close proximity of time when the victim was last seen with the appellant and when the victim was found unconscious and in injured condition, which ultimately resulted into her death – Nothing on record to suggest that the due procedure was not followed or there was deprivation of the legal aid or legal assistance to accused – Views taken by the Courts below with regard to the conviction of the appellant for offences charged against him, deem it proper to commute, and accordingly commute the sentence of death for the sentence of imprisonment for life, for offence punishable u/s. 302 IPC – While balancing the scales of retributive justice and restorative justice, appellant-accused, sentenced to imprisonment for a period of twenty years instead of imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life for the offence under section 376A, IPC.Sentencing – Restorative Justice – One of the basic principles of restorative justice is to give an opportunity to the offender to repair the damage caused, and to become a socially useful individual when he is released from the jail – maximum punishment prescribed may not always be the determinative factor for repairing the crippled psyche of the offender – Hence, while balancing the scales of retributive justice and restorative justice.
Judge	Hon'ble Ms. Justice Bela M. Trivedi
Neutral Citation	2022 INSC 429
Petitioner	Mohd. Firoz
Respondent	State Of Madhya Pradesh
SCR	[2022] 19 S.C.R. 168
Judgement Date	2022-04-19
Case Number	612

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

Mohd. Firoz Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Please Log-in to view this content

Bhagwani Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh

Lochan Shrivas Vs. The State of Chhattisgarh

Ravi S/o Ashok Ghumare Vs. The State of Maharashtra

Veerendra Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

State of U.p. Vs. Munshi

Manoj Mishra @ Chhotkau Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh

State of U.p. Vs. Chhoteylal

Nand Kishore Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

State of Maharashtra Vs. Gajanan @ Hemant Janardhan Wankhede

Mohd. Firoz Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Mohd. Firoz Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Bhagwani Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh

Lochan Shrivas Vs. The State of Chhattisgarh

Ravi S/o Ashok Ghumare Vs. The State of Maharashtra

Veerendra Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

State of U.p. Vs. Munshi

Manoj Mishra @ Chhotkau Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh

State of U.p. Vs. Chhoteylal

Nand Kishore Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

State of Maharashtra Vs. Gajanan @ Hemant Janardhan Wankhede

Mohd. Firoz Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh