Case analysis of dhananjay, Lecture notes of Law

Download Case analysis of dhananjay and more Lecture notes Law in PDF only on Docsity!

www.clatbook.com

NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF STUDY AND RESEARCH

IN LAW, RANCHI

SUBJECT :Legal Methods Project

ROLL NUMBER - 68

Dhananjay Chatterjee Alias

Dhana vs State Of W.B.

Kumar

Harshvardhan

Section-A

www.clatbook.com CASE ANALYSIS : Dhananjay Chatterjee Alias Dhana vs State Of W.B.

FACTS:- Hetal Parekh a young 18 years old school-going girl was raped and murdered in her flat

No. 3-A, on the third floor of 'Anand Apartment'. The appellant was challenged and tried for rape and murder and also for an offence under Section 380 IPC, for committing theft of a wrist watch from the said flat. The appellant,Dhananjay was one of the security guards deputed to guard the building 'Anand Apartment' by M/s. Security and Investigating Bureau of which Mr. Shyam Karmakar was the proprietor. Hetal,the deceased was complaining to her mother Yashmoti Parekh that the appellant had been teasing her on her way to and back from the school and had proposed to her on that day to accompany him to cinema hall to watch a movie. Yashmoti told her husband Nagardas Parekh on about the behaviour of the appellant towards their daughter, who in turn complained to Shyam Karmakar and requested him to replace the appellant. As per their normal routine when Nagardas Parekh and his son Bhawesh Parekh,father and brother of the deceased respectively, left for their place of business and college in the morning on and Yashmoti,the mother of the deceased had gone to visit temple.At that time,Hetal,the deceased was all alone in the flat at that time.Shortly after Yashmoti, the mother of the deceased left for the Temple, the appellant rushed to her flat and commited the alleged crimes. When Yashmoti returned from the Temple,on reaching her flat she after entering in the flat found Hetal,lying on the floor,unconscious.The doctor after examining the deceased, pronounced her dead. Thereafter her father informed the Bhawanipore Police Station at about the telephone. On receipt of the telephonic message, sub-inspector Gurupada Som, the acting duty officer, rushed to the place of occurrence along with some other police personnel and recorded the FIR on the statement of Yashmoti Parekh, the mother of the deceased and commenced investigation. The sessions Judge in this case relying upon circumstantial evidence found the accused guilty and therefore,sentenced him to death. The appeal of Dhanajay Chatterjee for proving his innocence was also rejected by the Calcutta High court and thereafter by the Supreme Court.

www.clatbook.com

CASE ANALYSIS:-

ISSUE1-

 Whether or not the appellant was the assailant who had raped and murdered the defenceless young girl.

PROSECUTION’S ARGUEMENTS:-

1.The Prosecution,on the basis of circumstantial evidences argued that the appellant was the one who raped the deceased.The appellant used to follow and tease the deceased everytime she used to come back and go to school.She had also complained to her parents about this and accordingly,a transfer order was made of the appellant to Paras apartment. Also,he had used the lift for going to the flat of the deceased which is evident from the testimony of the guard of the lift.Also,his semen was found inside the vagina of the deceased.On the place of incident,a cream coloured button of the appelant’s shirt was also found which later on after investigation was proved to be that from the shirt of the appellant.Also,the appellant had escaped after this incident and after many raids by the police,he could not be found and after many months he was arrested from the house of his uncle where he was hiding behind grass straws.Also,his shirt and trouser which he was wearing at the time of the incident was recovered from the house of appellant.Also,the watch of the deceased which was stolen from her flat at the time of incident was also recovered from his house. APPELLANT’S ARGUMENTS:- The counsel for the appellant argued that the appellant had gone to cinema hall just after performing his duty at Anand apartment and after watching the movie,he had bought some fruits and then rushed to his village for attending the thread ceremony of his brother nad he was not present at the place of incident when this event took place. SUPREME COURT’S DECISION:- All the circumstances referred to above and relied upon by the prosecution have been conclusively established by the prosecution. They arc specific and of clinching nature and all of them irresistibly lead to the conclusion that the appellant alone was guilty of committing rape of Hetal and

www.clatbook.com subsequently murdering her. All the circumstances which have been conclusively established are consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the appellant and are totally inconsistent with his innocence. Not only in the cross-examination of various prosecution witnesses, but even during the arguments, nothing has been pointed out as to why any of the witness for the prosecution should have falsely implicated the appellant in such a heinous crime. None of the witnesses had any motive to falsely implicate him. None had any enmity with him. The witnesses produced by the prosecution have withstood the test of cross-examination well and their creditworthiness and reliability has not been demolished in any manner. All the circumstances established by the prosecution, as discussed above, are conclusive in nature and specific in details. They are consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the appellant and totally inconsistent with his innocence.The court, therefore, in complete agreement with the trial court and the High Court that the prosecution has established the guilt of the appellant beyond a reasonable doubt and the court, therefore, uphold his conviction for the offences under Sections 302, 376 and 380 IPC.

ISSUE 2-

 Whether the appellant had a motive to commit the alleged crime.

PROSECUTION’S ARGUEMENTS:-

Yes,the appellant had motive to commit the alleged crime as we can see from the evidences that the deceased was being teased by the appellant when she used to go to or came back from the school. She had brought it to the notice of her mother PW 3 on a number of occasions, the latest in the series being on 2.3.1990. Yashmoti PW 3 informed her husband Nagardas PW 4 about the complaints. From the testimony of Nagardas PW 4, it transpires that after he came to know about the misbehaviour of the appellant from his wife PW 3 on 2.3.1990, he called some other dwellers of the Apartment to apprise them of the same. Mahendra Chauhatia PW 13 and Harish Vakharia PW 14 have deposed that they had been called by Nagardas PW 4 who reported to them that the appellant had been teasing his daughter and that PW 4 had suggested that the appellant should be replaced by another security guard. They (PW 13 and PW 14) both agreed. The testimony of PW 13 and PW 14 has remained totally unchallenged in cross-examination. After consulting PW 13 and PW 14, Nagardas PW 4 asked Shyamal Karmakar PW 21, the employer of the appellant, to meet him and according to the statement of PW 21 Karmakar he came to the flat of Nagardas PW 4 on 3.3.1990, where he was informed about the teasing of the daughter of PW 4 by the appellant, PW 21 deposed that Nagardas PW 4 told him to replace the appellant by another security guard and even handed over a written complaint Ex.4 to him. APPELLANT’S ARGUMENTS:- The counsel for the defendant argued that the delay in the seizure of complaint Ex.4 and the transfer order, on 29.6.1990 were indicative of the fact that both the documents had come into existence subsequently as an after thought. SUPREME COURT’S DECISION:- Supreme court did not found any force in this submission of appellant. PW 4 who gave a written complaint to PW 21 and PW 9 who delivered the transfer order issued by PW 21 to the appellant were

www.clatbook.com In the court’s opinion, the measure of punishment in a given case must depend upon the atrocity of the crime; the conduct of the criminal and the defenceless and unprotected state of the victim. Imposition of appropriate punishment is the manner in which the courts respond to the society's cry for justice against the criminals. Justice demands that courts should impose punishment fitting to the crime so that the courts reflect public abhorrence of the crime. The courts must not only keep in view the rights of the criminal but also the rights of the victim of crime and the society at large while considering imposition of appropriate punishment. The sordid episode of the security guard, whose sacred duty was to ensure the protection and welfare of the inhabitants of the flats in the apartments, should have subjected the deceased, a resident of one of the flats, to gratify his lust and murder her in retaliation for his transfer on her complaint, makes the crime even more heinous. Keeping in view the medical evidence and the state in which the body of the deceased was found, it is obvious that a most heinous type of barbaric rape and murder was committed on a helpless and defenceless school-going girl of 18 years. If the security guards behave in this manner, who will guard the guards? The faith of the society by such a barbaric act of the guard, gets totally shaken and its cry for justice becomes loud and clear. The offence was not only inhuman, and barbaric but it was a totally ruthless crime of rape followed by cold blooded murder and an affront to the human dignity of the society. The savage nature of the crime has shocked our judicial conscious. There are no extenuating or mitigating circumstances whatsoever in the case. The court agrees that a real and abiding concern for the dignity of human life is required to be kept in mind by the courts while considering the confirmation of the sentence of death but a cold blooded pre-planned brutal murder, without any provocation, after committing rape on an innocent and defenceless young girl of 18 years, by the security guard certainly makes this case a 'rare of the rarest' cases which calls for no punishment other than the capital punishment and we accordingly confirm the sentence of death imposed upon the appellant for the offence under Section 302 IPC, The order of sentence imposed on the appellant by the courts below for offences under Section 376 and 380 IPC are also confirmed along with the directions relating thereto as in the event of the execution of the appellant, those sentences would only remain of academic interest. This appeal failed and is hereby dismissed.

www.clatbook.com

CRITICAL ANALYSIS

 This critics is based on an article written by Akhilesh Patel,named ‘’Indian judicial process:A

critique’’ 1

In the decision given by supreme court in this case,we may say that- (1 * According to Article 21 , No person shall be deprived from his personal life and liberty except procedure established by ‘law’ and that Law must be just, fair and reasonable. Where a death penalty is given to a person, he cannot exercise the rights under Article 19(1)(a) to( g), because it amounts to the absolute restriction on those freedoms which is unconstitutional because law requires only reasonable restriction on those freedoms on grounds prescribed under Article 19(2) to (5). Besides it section 302 of I.P.C is a pre constitutional law which is also hit by the art 13(2) of the constitution. (2 * Doctrine of rarest of rare case does not have the quality of predictability according to law but life of a person is kept at the sweet will of the judge which is against the rule of law envisaged by the constitution under Article 14. (3 *Petitioner was given double punishment for the same offence in violation of the art 20(2) first punishment he faced was 14 years living in jail under death row and second was the capital punishment itself. Examples of gross constitutional faults can also be seen in Ramjawaya kapoor^2 , A.K.Gopalan^3 , Champakam Dorairajan^4 cases.  This critics is based on an article written by a libertian socialist Anoop Saha,,named ‘’Revisiting Dhananjoy Chatterjee’’^5 (^1) Article named Indian Judicial process:A critical Analysis @http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/articles/Indian- Judicial-Process-A-Critique-3363.asp (^2) Ram Jawaya Kapoor v. State of Punjab, AIR 1955 SC 549 (^3) AK Gopalan v. State of Madras, AIR 1950 SC 27 (^4) State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan, AIR 1951 SC 226

www.clatbook.com how are they now? Let's ask these questions. Have we not condemned the entire family by murdering Dhananjoy. More often than not, death sentence is a punishment for the family of the accussed than the guilty himself/herself. When will the people of this country understand this simple logic? The case for his mercy petition to be accepted was pretty strong. mentions, As this critical analysis,"no one could have deserved mercy better than Dhananjoy. He was poor. His conviction was based largely on circumstantial evidence that could well have been fabricated by someone else who committed the offence, but was powerful and rich. He had no previous record of crime. He did not have the services of good, expensive lawyers. His behaviour in the jail gave no indication that he was a hardened criminal. He had languished in jails for almost fourteen years under fear of death. His family (including his wife) remained convinced that he was innocent. Generally speaking, in case of a rapist, his wife refuses to support him. His wife, after his death would have would have to spend the rest of her life as a destitute widow." Inspite of all that, we killed him for the sake of revenge, at best. The blunt question is, each one of us who asked for his death, each one of us who made up this public opinion to murder him, what have we achieved? We might have got our momentary satisfaction of being a part of this collective murder of a social animal. But beyond that, what? What has Ms. Malini Bhattacharya, wife of Buddhadeb Bhattacharya, why is she happier now than she was in 2004? Why is Ms. Gillian Rosemary D'Costa Hart, principal of the victims school, why is she leading a more satisfactory life after bringing grief to his family? Dhananjoy was murdered on the eve of the independence day, that also happenned to be his BIRTHDAY. How brutal can a state or its people be? Two years later, it is time we ask these questions and try to find answers to them. We made a terrible mistake on August 14, 2004. Let's avoid it in future. Let's not allow our collective conscience to be so dumbed down, that we need to participate in these public executions to boost our sagging morales, to elevate our sense of morality. Assuming for a moment, if Dhananjoy was indeed ' nirdosh ', can we ever be able to forgive ourselves? Two years later, we should all hang our heads in shame. His last words were, " ami aparadhi na, Ishwar apnader bhalo koruk (I am innocent, I am not a criminal. May the Lord bless you)." That's enough to send a shiver.