<p>The Supreme Court has set aside death penalty awarded to a man in gangrape and murder of a 10-year-old girl in 2015, while noting serious lapses on the part of police, prosecution, the trial court, and the high court.</p><p>A bench of Justices B R Gavai, J B Pardiwala, and Prashant Kumar Mishra remitted the matter back to the Patna High Court for a fresh consideration of the death reference and criminal appeal filed by convict Munna Pandey.</p><p>The court said it was aghast and shocked to see the court below, including the High Court, proceeded on the footing that the appellant was guilty.</p>.Eminent citizens ask SC to take cognisance of Udhayanidhi Stalin's 'Sanatan Dharma' remark.<p>"Having regard to the fact that an innocent girl of 10 years was lured, raped, and brutally murdered, we looked into the entire record very closely. Our mind got clouded with suspicion. Ultimately, we noticed something very shocking. The shocking aspect, if would have gone unnoticed at our end too, then it would have led to a serious miscarriage of justice," the bench said.</p><p>The bench pointed out all the witnesses before the police said that it was Pritam Tiwari (juvenile co-convict) had come to the house of the victim on the fateful day and had taken the victim along with him to his house to watch TV and it was he who was found locking the door when the witnesses inquired about the whereabouts of the victim.</p><p>"Neither the defence counsel, nor the public prosecutor or the presiding officer of the trial court, and unfortunately, even the High Court thought fit to look into this aspect of the matter and try to reach to the truth," the bench said.</p><p>The bench also pointed out, "We regret that the High Court completely overlooked these aspects".</p><p>The defence counsel and the prosecutor also failed to confront the witnesses and the trial judge acted as "mute spectator".</p><p>In dealing with the death reference, the HC is not only to see whether the order passed by the Sessions Judge is correct, but to examine the case for itself and even direct a further enquiry or the taking of additional evidence, the bench added.</p><p>In the case, the police did not collect or produce the forensic report and appellant was not subjected to medical examination after arrest, though it assumed greater importance in a case where rape victim is dead, the bench said, highlighting other serious lapses in the matter.</p><p>"No trial can be treated as a fair trial unless there is an impartial judge conducting the trial, an honest, able and fair defence counsel and equally honest, able and fair public prosecutor. A fair trial necessarily includes fair and proper opportunity to the prosecutor to prove the guilt of the accused and opportunity to the accused to prove his innocence," the bench said.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court has set aside death penalty awarded to a man in gangrape and murder of a 10-year-old girl in 2015, while noting serious lapses on the part of police, prosecution, the trial court, and the high court.</p><p>A bench of Justices B R Gavai, J B Pardiwala, and Prashant Kumar Mishra remitted the matter back to the Patna High Court for a fresh consideration of the death reference and criminal appeal filed by convict Munna Pandey.</p><p>The court said it was aghast and shocked to see the court below, including the High Court, proceeded on the footing that the appellant was guilty.</p>.Eminent citizens ask SC to take cognisance of Udhayanidhi Stalin's 'Sanatan Dharma' remark.<p>"Having regard to the fact that an innocent girl of 10 years was lured, raped, and brutally murdered, we looked into the entire record very closely. Our mind got clouded with suspicion. Ultimately, we noticed something very shocking. The shocking aspect, if would have gone unnoticed at our end too, then it would have led to a serious miscarriage of justice," the bench said.</p><p>The bench pointed out all the witnesses before the police said that it was Pritam Tiwari (juvenile co-convict) had come to the house of the victim on the fateful day and had taken the victim along with him to his house to watch TV and it was he who was found locking the door when the witnesses inquired about the whereabouts of the victim.</p><p>"Neither the defence counsel, nor the public prosecutor or the presiding officer of the trial court, and unfortunately, even the High Court thought fit to look into this aspect of the matter and try to reach to the truth," the bench said.</p><p>The bench also pointed out, "We regret that the High Court completely overlooked these aspects".</p><p>The defence counsel and the prosecutor also failed to confront the witnesses and the trial judge acted as "mute spectator".</p><p>In dealing with the death reference, the HC is not only to see whether the order passed by the Sessions Judge is correct, but to examine the case for itself and even direct a further enquiry or the taking of additional evidence, the bench added.</p><p>In the case, the police did not collect or produce the forensic report and appellant was not subjected to medical examination after arrest, though it assumed greater importance in a case where rape victim is dead, the bench said, highlighting other serious lapses in the matter.</p><p>"No trial can be treated as a fair trial unless there is an impartial judge conducting the trial, an honest, able and fair defence counsel and equally honest, able and fair public prosecutor. A fair trial necessarily includes fair and proper opportunity to the prosecutor to prove the guilt of the accused and opportunity to the accused to prove his innocence," the bench said.</p>
