# Dashwanth v. State of Tamil Nadu

- **Citation:** 2025 INSC 1203
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 2025-10-08
- **Bench:** Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol, Sandeep Mehta
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/dashwanth-v-state-of-tamil-nadu-38046
- **Pages:** 44

## Headnote

Trial Court found appellant guilty for the charges framed u/ss.302,
201, 363, 366 and 354-B of the IPC and s.8 r/w. s.7 and s.6 r/w.
s.5(m) of the POCSO Act. An appeal against the said conviction
was dismissed by the High Court and confirmed the death
sentence awarded to the appellant. Whether the prosecution has
proved the vital circumstances, viz., (i) last seen together theory;
(ii) suspicious movement of the appellant captured in the video
footage of the CCTV camera installed at a nearby temple; (iii)
confessional/disclosure statement made by the appellant leading
to the incriminating discoveries/recoveries and (iv) FSL reports
establishing the DNA profiling comparison, which constituted the
entire edifice of the prosecution case and on which the conviction
of the appellant was based.
Headnotes†
Penal Code, 1860 - ss.302, 201, 363, 366 and 354-B of the IPC -
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - s.8
r/w. s.7 and s.6 r/w. s.5(m) - A 7 year old female child went
missing - Later, a charred body of the child was recovered in
furtherance of the disclosure statement made by the appellant
herein - Trial Court found appellant guilty for the charges
framed u/ss.302, 201, 363, 366 and 354-B of the IPC and s.8
r/w. s.7 and s.6 r/w. s.5(m) of the POCSO Act - Appellant
was sentenced in each of the aforesaid sections along with
a death sentence - The trial Court also forwarded a reference
u/s.366 of the CrPC for confirmation of the death sentence -
Appeal preferred by the appellant before the High Court was
dismissed and death sentence was confirmed - Correctness:
Held: 1. The prosecution has miserably failed to prove the vital
circumstances, viz., (i) last seen together theory; (ii) suspicious
movement of the appellant captured in the video footage of the CCTV
* Author
588
[2025] 10 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
camera installed at a nearby temple; (iii) confessional/disclosure
statement made by the appellant leading to the incriminating
discoveries/recoveries and (iv) FSL reports establishing the DNA
profiling comparison, which constituted the entire edifice of the
prosecution case and on which the conviction of the appellant
was based - It would not be safe to uphold the conviction of the
appellant as recorded by the trial Court and affirmed by the High
Court - Thus, the conviction of the appellant and the sentences
awarded to him, by the trial Court and affirmed by the High Court
are also set aside. [Paras 81-83]
Penal Code, 1860 - ss.302, 201, 363, 366 and 354-B of the IPC -
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - s.8
r/w. s.7 and s.6 r/w. s.5(m) - Appellant was found guilty for
the charges framed u/ss.302, 201, 363, 366 and 354-B of the
IPC and s.8 r/w. s.7 and s.6 r/w. s.5(m) of the POCSO Act by
the Courts below - Whether the prosecution has proved the
vital circumstance, viz., last seen together theory:
Held: The first and most critical circumstance on which the
prosecution placed reliance was that of last seen together - The
witness who gave evidence in support of this circumstance was
PW-3, who claimed that on the fateful day, he saw the appellant and
the victim playing on the second floor of the building, on the first
floor whereof, the complainant (PW-1) being the father of the victim
resided with his family - When the frantic process for searching
the victim started, PW-3 claims to have informed the complainant
(PW-1) that his daughter was not in the house and might be playing
upstairs and advised him to go and look for her on the upper floor
of the building - Had there been an iota of truth in the version of
PW-3, he would definitely have told the complainant (PW-1) that he
had seen the victim in the company of the appellant between 6:00
p.m. to 6:15 p.m. on the second floor of the building - The glaring
omission on the part of PW-3 in failing to share this vital information
is also manifest from the complaint filed by the complainant (PW-1) -
The theory put forth in the evidence of (PW-3)

## Text

_Characters 0–39,864 of 98,781. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39864 for what follows._

[2025] 10 S.C.R. 587 : 2025 INSC 1203
Dashwanth
v.
State of Tamil Nadu
(Criminal Appeal No(s). 3633-3634 of 2024)
08 October 2025
[Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol and Sandeep Mehta,* JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Trial Court found appellant guilty for the charges framed u/ss.302,
201, 363, 366 and 354-B of the IPC and s.8 r/w. s.7 and s.6 r/w.
s.5(m) of the POCSO Act. An appeal against the said conviction
was dismissed by the High Court and confirmed the death
sentence awarded to the appellant. Whether the prosecution has
proved the vital circumstances, viz., (i) last seen together theory;
(ii) suspicious movement of the appellant captured in the video
footage of the CCTV camera installed at a nearby temple; (iii)
confessional/disclosure statement made by the appellant leading
to the incriminating discoveries/recoveries and (iv) FSL reports
establishing the DNA profiling comparison, which constituted the
entire edifice of the prosecution case and on which the conviction
of the appellant was based.
Headnotes†
Penal Code, 1860 - ss.302, 201, 363, 366 and 354-B of the IPC -
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - s.8
r/w. s.7 and s.6 r/w. s.5(m) - A 7 year old female child went
missing - Later, a charred body of the child was recovered in
furtherance of the disclosure statement made by the appellant
herein - Trial Court found appellant guilty for the charges
framed u/ss.302, 201, 363, 366 and 354-B of the IPC and s.8
r/w. s.7 and s.6 r/w. s.5(m) of the POCSO Act - Appellant
was sentenced in each of the aforesaid sections along with
a death sentence - The trial Court also forwarded a reference
u/s.366 of the CrPC for confirmation of the death sentence -
Appeal preferred by the appellant before the High Court was
dismissed and death sentence was confirmed - Correctness:
Held: 1. The prosecution has miserably failed to prove the vital
circumstances, viz., (i) last seen together theory; (ii) suspicious
movement of the appellant captured in the video footage of the CCTV
* Author
588
[2025] 10 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
camera installed at a nearby temple; (iii) confessional/disclosure
statement made by the appellant leading to the incriminating
discoveries/recoveries and (iv) FSL reports establishing the DNA
profiling comparison, which constituted the entire edifice of the
prosecution case and on which the conviction of the appellant
was based - It would not be safe to uphold the conviction of the
appellant as recorded by the trial Court and affirmed by the High
Court - Thus, the conviction of the appellant and the sentences
awarded to him, by the trial Court and affirmed by the High Court
are also set aside. [Paras 81-83]
Penal Code, 1860 - ss.302, 201, 363, 366 and 354-B of the IPC -
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - s.8
r/w. s.7 and s.6 r/w. s.5(m) - Appellant was found guilty for
the charges framed u/ss.302, 201, 363, 366 and 354-B of the
IPC and s.8 r/w. s.7 and s.6 r/w. s.5(m) of the POCSO Act by
the Courts below - Whether the prosecution has proved the
vital circumstance, viz., last seen together theory:
Held: The first and most critical circumstance on which the
prosecution placed reliance was that of last seen together - The
witness who gave evidence in support of this circumstance was
PW-3, who claimed that on the fateful day, he saw the appellant and
the victim playing on the second floor of the building, on the first
floor whereof, the complainant (PW-1) being the father of the victim
resided with his family - When the frantic process for searching
the victim started, PW-3 claims to have informed the complainant
(PW-1) that his daughter was not in the house and might be playing
upstairs and advised him to go and look for her on the upper floor
of the building - Had there been an iota of truth in the version of
PW-3, he would definitely have told the complainant (PW-1) that he
had seen the victim in the company of the appellant between 6:00
p.m. to 6:15 p.m. on the second floor of the building - The glaring
omission on the part of PW-3 in failing to share this vital information
is also manifest from the complaint filed by the complainant (PW-1) -
The theory put forth in the evidence of (PW-3) that he had seen
the victim in the company of the appellant on 05.02.2017 i.e., the
date of the incident, is nothing but a sheer concoction, bereft of
credibility - The statement of PW-3 that the said witness, for the
first time, divulged the information comprising the circumstance of
last seen together to the 2nd Investigating Officer (PW-30) only
on 24.04.2017, i.e., more than two months and 20 days after the
incident - Therefore, the circumstance of last seen together was
[2025] 10 S.C.R.
589
Dashwanth v. State of Tamil Nadu
created by the Investigating Officer (PW-30) through the witness
(PW-3) in order to lend credence to the otherwise weak case of
the prosecution. [Paras 44-46]
Penal Code, 1860 - ss.302, 201, 363, 366 and 354-B of the IPC -
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - s.8 r/w.
s.7 and s.6 r/w. s.5(m) - Appellant was found appellant guilty
for the charges framed u/ss.302, 201, 363, 366 and 354-B of
the IPC and s.8 r/w. s.7 and s.6 r/w. s.5(m) of the POCSO Act
by the Courts below - Whether the prosecution has proved the
vital circumstance of the video footage of the CCTV camera:
Held: The next piece of circumstantial evidence on relied upon
was in the form of the video footage of the CCTV camera, the
primary evidence of the so-called CCTV footage is not available
on record - The oral evidence regarding the CCTV footage was
given by PW-6 being the In-charge of the nearby temple - In the
absence of the CCTV footage being collected and exhibited as
per law, no credence can be given to the evidence of PW-6, more
so, when there is grave discrepancy between his version and the
version of the complainant (PW-1). [Paras 47, 49, 51]
Penal Code, 1860 - ss.302, 201, 363, 366 and 354-B of the IPC -
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - s.8
r/w. s.7 and s.6 r/w. s.5(m) - Appellant was found guilty for
the charges framed u/ss.302, 201, 363, 366 and 354-B of the
IPC and s.8 r/w. s.7 and s.6 r/w. s.5(m) of the POCSO Act by
the Courts below - Whether the prosecution has proved the
vital circumstance of the confessional/disclosure statement/s
made by the appellant leading to the incriminating discoveries/
recoveries:
Held: The third circumstance on which the prosecution relied
upon to bring home the guilt of the appellant was in form of the
confessional/disclosure statement/s made by the appellant leading
to the incriminating discoveries/recoveries - The fact that the police
officers had told the complainant regarding the location where the
body of the victim was disposed of, in the morning of 08.02.2017,
is itself sufficient to discard the theory of the prosecution that all the
incriminating discoveries were made in pursuance of the disclosure
statement made by the appellant - It is apparent that the police had
already created the entire story and later on, tried to fit the same
into a sequence by postponing the formal arrest of the appellant
590
[2025] 10 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
in order to implicate him in this case - Thus, the claim made by
the prosecution that the dead body of the victim was recovered
in furtherance of the disclosure statement made by the appellant
is belied by cogent material available on record - There is no
hesitation in holding that recoveries of the bag, allegedly containing
the bottles in which petrol was carried and the undergarment of
the victim, were not effected at the instance of the appellant and
were planted recoveries - The theory of confessional/disclosure
statement of the appellant leading to the discoveries is nothing
but a creation of the Investigating Officer (PW-29) and as a matter
of fact, all the incriminating facts and circumstances were already
in the knowledge of the Investigating Officer (PW-29) and were
subsequently woven into a story, projecting a hypothesis that a
voluntary confession was made by the appellant leading to the
incriminating discoveries of the dead body, the ornaments, etc. -
The signatures of appellant were obtained on the confessional
statements by detaining him in advance and torturing and beating
him and that the appellant was implicated in the case falsely.
[Paras 52, 54, 55, 60, 67]
Penal Code, 1860 - ss.302, 201, 363, 366 and 354-B of the IPC -
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - s.8
r/w. s.7 and s.6 r/w. s.5(m) - Appellant was found guilty for
the charges framed u/ss.302, 201, 363, 366 and 354-B of the
IPC and s.8 r/w. s.7 and s.6 r/w. s.5(m) of the POCSO Act by
the Courts below - Whether the prosecution has proved the
vital circumstance of the FSL reports establishing the DNA
profiling comparison, which constituted the entire edifice
of the prosecution case and on which the conviction of the
appellant was based:
Held: The testimony of the Investigating Officer (PW-29) confirms
that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the chain of
custody of the forensic articles/samples right from the time of
seizure till they reached the FSL - The malkhana In-charge of
the police station was not examined in evidence - Neither any
forwarding documents except for a forwarding letter, authorising
the movement of the forensic articles/samples were proved by the
Investigation Officer (PW-29) nor any witness who carried these
samples from the police station to the Court or the concerned
laboratories, was examined in evidence - Since the sanctity of
the samples was not proved by proper evidence, as a necessary
corollary, the reports of scientific analysis would lose significance
[2025] 10 S.C.R.
591
Dashwanth v. State of Tamil Nadu
and cannot be relied upon - Though the scientific experts concluded
that the DNA profile of the semen stain found on the underwear
of the victim was matching with the DNA profile of the appellant
but as the very factum of recovery of the Material Object, i.e., the
undergarment of the victim has not been established beyond doubt,
as a consequence, no sanctity whatsoever can be attached to the
conclusions drawn in the Expert Report (Exhibit P-32) - A very
serious question has to be posed regarding the time of collection
of the blood samples of the appellant - There was no reason
whatsoever for the Investigating Agency to have waited for four
months before collecting the blood samples of the appellant -
There is a strong possibility that the delay may have been utilized
to manipulate the samples. [Paras 71, 76, 78]
Crime - Heinous crime - Punishment cannot be based on
moral convictions or conjectures - Prosecution is duty-bound
to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt:
Held: The present case pertains to the commission of a heinous
offence involving a girl of tender age of 7 years, at the same time,
this Court cannot ignore or bypass the fundamental principle of
criminal jurisprudence that the prosecution is duty-bound to prove
the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt - The onus
is heavier in a case based purely on circumstantial evidence -
However, regrettably, the prosecution has miserably failed to do so
in the instant case, leaving the Court with no choice but to acquit
the appellant, despite the heinous nature of the crime - While
it is acknowledged that the acquittal of an individual involved in
a heinous crime can lead to societal distress and cause grave
anguish to the victim's family, the legal framework does not permit
the Courts to punish an accused person based merely on moral
convictions or conjectures - Each case must be adjudicated by the
Courts rigorously on its individual merits and in strict conformity
with the law, without yielding to public sentiment and external
pressures. [Para 80]
Constitution of India - Constitutional right to defend:
Held: The constitutional right afforded to an accused charged with
an offence to defend himself is not illusory or imaginary - For the
trial to be fair and reasonable, an effective opportunity to defend
must be provided to the accused and representation by a counsel
of choice is an important component of this guarantee - In a
592
[2025] 10 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
case where accused is facing charges for offences which carry
capital punishment, this constitutional mandate becomes even
more sacrosanct, and it is the duty of the Court as well as the
State to ensure that the accused is not prejudiced or deprived of
a fair opportunity of defending himself in a case where he may be
awarded death penalty. [Para 36]
Natural Justice - Criminal Law - Trial - Fair opportunity of
defending:
Held: Such opportunity would require: (a) Providing copies of all
relied upon documents to the accused immediately on submission
of report u/s.173(2) CrPC (Section 193 BNSS)/committal of case
u/s.209 CrPC (Section 232 BNSS); (b) Ensuring that the accused
is represented by a lawyer of his own choice and in case, he/she
is not in a position to engage a private counsel then, a legal aid
defence counsel having requisite experience must be appointed to
represent him at the trial; (c) The legal aid counsel so appointed
should be given sufficient opportunity to go through the record and
prepare the matter for carrying out effective cross-examination
from the witnesses; (d) The Court should not act as a mute
spectator during recording of evidence, as provided u/s.165 of the
Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Section 168 of the Bhartiya Sakshya
Adhiniyam, 2023) - The Court must remain vigilant, and in case
any important question necessary to arrive at a just decision of the
case is omitted to be put to the witnesses either by the defence
counsel or the public prosecutor, the Court must not let such
lacuna creep into the proceedings, and it must be ensured that
Court put questions to the witnesses for ensuring fairness in the
proceedings. [Para 37]
Case Law Cited
Sharad Birdhichand Sharda v. State of Maharashtra [1985] 1 SCR
88 : (1984) 4 SCC 116; Prakash Nishad @ Kewat Zinak Nishad v.
State of Maharashtra [2023] 8 SCR 152 : 2023 SCC Online SC
666 - relied on.
Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab [1983] 1 SCR 145; Santa
Singh v. State of Punjab [1977] 1 SCR 229 : (1976) 4 SCC 190;
Allauddin Mian and Ors. v. State of Bihar [1989] 2 SCR 498 :
(1989) 3 SCC 5; Malkiat Singh v. State of Punjab [1991] 2 SCR
256 : (1991) 4 SCC 341; Dattaraya v. State of Maharashtra [2019]
11 SCR 295 : (2020) 14 SCC 290; Anokhilal v. State of Madhya
[2025] 10 S.C.R.
593
Dashwanth v. State of Tamil Nadu
Pradesh [2019] 18 SCR 1196 : 2019 SCC OnLine SC 1637; State
of Uttar Pradesh v. Deoman Upadhyaya [1961] 1 SCR 14 : 1960
SCC OnLine SC 8; Mohmed Inayatullah v. State of Maharashtra
[1976] 1 SCR 715 : (1976) 1 SCC 828; Earabhadrappa v. State of
Karnataka [1983] 2 SCR 552 : (1983) 2 SCC 330; Bodhraj alias
Bodha and Others v. State of Jammu and Kashmir [2002] Supp.
2 SCR 67 : (2002) 8 SCC 45 - referred to.
List of Acts
Penal Code, 1860; Protection of Children from Sexual Offences
Act, 2012; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Constitution of India;
Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023.
List of Keywords
Murder; Child missing; Charred body; Disclosure statement;
Confession; Last seen together theory; CCTV footage; Incriminating
discoveries; FSL reports; DNA profiling; Circumstantial evidence;
Heinous crime; Moral convictions; Conjectures; False implication;
Death sentence; Discrepency in versions of witnesses; Constitutional
right to defend; Natural Justice; Criminal Law; Trial; Fair opportunity
of defending.
Case Arising From
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No(s).
3633-3634 of 2024
From the Judgment and Order dated 10.07.2018 of the High Court
of Judicature at Madras in CRLA No. 234 of 2018 and RT No. 1
of 2018
Appearances for Parties
Advs. for the Appellant:
Siddharth Aggarwal, Sr. Adv., Ms. Manasa Ramakrishna, Vishwajeet
Singh, Ms. Trisha Chandran, Karan Dhalla, Prashanth Sharmila
Prakash, Ms. Shreya Rastogi, Ms. Rajni Gupta, Abhimanue
Shrestha, Shivendra Gupta.
Advs. for the Respondent:
V.Krishnamurthy, Sr. Adv./AAG, Sabarish Subramanian, Vishnu
Unnikrishnan, Ms. Azka Sheikh Kalia, Ms. Jahnavi Taneja, Danish
Saifi.
594
[2025] 10 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Judgment
Mehta, J.
1.
Heard.
2.
The appellant herein was tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila
Court, Chengalpet1 in Special Sessions Case No. 33 of 2017 for the
offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 354-B, 302, and 201
of the Indian Penal Code, 18602 and Section 8 read with Section 7
and Section 6 read with Section 5(m) of the Protection of Children
from Sexual Offences Act, 20123. The trial Court, vide judgment
of conviction and order of sentence dated 19th February, 2018
convicted the accused-appellant4 for the aforementioned offences
and sentenced him in the terms indicated below: -
Section
Sentence
S. 363 IPC
7 years
S. 366 IPC
10 years
S. 354-B IPC
7 years
S. 201 IPC
7 years
S. 302 IPC
Death Penalty
S. 6 r/w S. 5 (m) of POCSO Act
10 years
S. 8 r/w S. 7 of POCSO Act
5 years
3.
Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred an appeal5 before the High
Court of Judicature at Madras6 for assailing his conviction and the
sentences awarded to him. The trial Court also forwarded a reference7
1
Hereinafter, referred to as 'trial Court'.
2
For short, 'IPC'.
3
For short, 'POCSO Act'.
4
Hereinafter, referred to as 'appellant'.
5
Criminal Appeal No. 234 of 2018.
6
Hereinafter, referred to as 'High Court'.
7
Referred Trial No. 1 of 2018.
[2025] 10 S.C.R.
595
Dashwanth v. State of Tamil Nadu
under Section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19738 for
confirmation of the death sentence. The learned Division Bench of the
High Court vide common judgment dated 10th July, 2018, dismissed
the appeal preferred by the appellant and answered the reference
in the affirmative thereby confirming the death sentence awarded to
the appellant by the trial Court. The said judgment of the High Court
is the subject matter of challenge in these appeals by special leave.
FACTUAL MATRIX: -
4.
In brief, the story of the prosecution is that a seven-year old female
child victim9, being the daughter of C.S.D. Babu (PW-1)10 and Sridevi
(PW-2), went missing on 5th February, 2017. The parents had gone
out shopping, and when they returned at about 7:15 p.m., they did
not see their daughter around, upon which a search was made with
the help of the neighbours including the appellant. The police were
also informed, but the efforts to trace out the child did not yield any
results. The hapless father, C.S.D. Babu (PW-1) filed a complaint11
at Mangadu Police Station at around 10:00 p.m. on 5th February,
2017 itself and based upon the same, a missing persons' case
was registered. The complainant (PW-1), in his efforts to get clues
about the whereabouts of his child, claims to have browsed video
footage of a CCTV camera installed at a nearby temple which gave
an indication as to the manner in which the child victim might have
been kidnapped. The police also followed the lead provided by the
complainant (PW-1) and went through the CCTV footage after which
the needle of suspicion turned towards the appellant.
5.
Based on this suspicion, the appellant was arrested on 8th February,
2017 at about 9 a.m. He allegedly confessed and made a disclosure
statement12 to N. Ravikumar, 1st Investigation Officer (PW-29)13 in
the presence of Sumathi (PW-7), Village Administrative Officer,
Madanandhapuram Village, and Mohandass (PW-8) who is the
assistant of PW-7.
8
Hereinafter, referred to as 'CrPC'.
9
Hereinafter, referred to as 'victim' or 'child victim'.
10
Hereinafter, referred to as 'complainant (PW-1)'.
11
Exhibit P-1
12
Exhibit P-8.
13
Hereinafter, referred to as 'Investigation Officer (PW-29)'.
596
[2025] 10 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
6.
The Investigating Officer (PW-29) claims that the charred body of
the child victim was recovered on 8th February, 2017 in furtherance
of the disclosure statement made by the appellant. The body was
identified by Muneesekar (PW-14), the Administrative Officer of the
school where the victim was studying. Based on the said recovery
of the victim's body, the missing persons' case was converted to a
crime report14 for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201,
363, 366 and 354-B of the IPC and Section 8 read with Section
7 and Section 6 read with Section 5(m) of the POCSO Act. The
disclosure statement of the appellant further led to the recovery of
an Apache motorcycle and a Oppo mobile phone. The Investigation
Officer (PW-29) prepared an observation mahazar15 and a rough site
sketch16 of the place from where the body of the victim was recovered.
The appellant also identified the blue-coloured travel bag17 in which
undergarments18 worn by the victim and two cold drink bottles19 were
placed. Forensic material was collected from the dead body of the
victim and the crime scene.
7.
Thereafter, the appellant allegedly took the police to his flat which
was located on the second floor of the very same building in which
the complainant (PW-1) also resided and pointed out the place where
the victim had been subjected to sexual abuse and later, murdered.
The Investigation Officer (PW-29) prepared the observation mahazar20
and site inspection plan21 of the said flat. The jeans pant22 and
t-shirt23 allegedly worn by the appellant at the time of commission
of the offence were recovered from the flat and the earrings24 and
14
FIR bearing Crime No. 285 of 2017.
15
Exhibit P-4.
16
Exhibit P-35.
17
Material Object No. 6.
18
Material Object No. 1.
19
Material Object No. 11.
20
Exhibit P-6.
21
Exhibit P-36.
22
Material Object No. 12.
23
Material Object No. 13.
24
Material Object No. 2.
[2025] 10 S.C.R.
597
Dashwanth v. State of Tamil Nadu
anklets25 of the victim along with the ATM card26, PAN card27, and
identity card28 of the appellant were also recovered from his purse29
during this sequence. Recovery of a helmet30 was also effected,
based on the interrogation conducted from the appellant.
8.
After the completion of the inquest proceedings, the child's body was
forwarded to the Kilpauk Medical College and Hospital, Chennai for
post-mortem examination. The body of the victim was subjected to
post-mortem by Dr. Karthika Devi (PW-16), medical officer, attached
with the Kilpauk Medical College and Hospital, Chennai. The medical
officer noticed that the body of the victim was charred and there were
bruises over the lower lip. The lower incisor teeth were loosened with
bruises around the surrounding area. The thigh bones collected from
the dead body were forwarded for DNA analysis, and the skull was
forwarded for superimposition so as to ascertain the identity of the
victim. Since the body was completely charred, the medical officer
expressed inability to give a definite opinion regarding the exact
cause of her death. However, on queries raised by the Investigation
Officer (PW-29), the medical officer gave an opinion that death by
smothering could not be ruled out. The appellant was subjected to
medical examination on 13th February, 2017.
9.
The Investigating Officer (PW-29) examined Santosh Kumar (PW-18),
who had purportedly sold petrol to the appellant which he carried in
the two bottles31 recovered from the blue bag32. The witness provided
information regarding the appellant making payment through a credit
card and based on the said statement, the credit card slip pertaining
to the purchase of petrol by the appellant was also seized.
10. Upon carrying out the scientific procedure of superimposition and
DNA examination, it was concluded that the body was of none other
than that of the victim, daughter of C.S.D. Babu (PW-1) and Sridevi
(PW-2).
25
Material Object No. 3.
26
Material Object No. 16.
27
Material Object No. 17.
28
Material Object No. 18.
29
Material Object No. 14.
30
Material Object No. 19.
31
Supra Note 19.
32
Supra Note 17.
598
[2025] 10 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
11. The Investigating Officer (PW-29) was transferred and thus further
investigation of the case was assigned to R.D. Vivekanandan, 2nd
Investigation Officer (PW-30)33 who completed the investigation and
filed a chargesheet against the appellant for the offences punishable
under Sections 363, 366, 354-B, 302 and 201 of the IPC and Section
8 read with Section 7 and Section 6 read with Section 5(m) of the
POCSO Act in the trial court.
12. The trial Court framed charges against the appellant for the
aforementioned offences, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed
trial. The prosecution examined 30 witnesses and exhibited 45
documents and 19 material objects in order to prove its case.
13. By resorting to the procedure under Section 313 CrPC, the appellant
was questioned and confronted with the incriminating circumstances
appearing against him in the case put up by the prosecution.
He refuted these allegations and claimed to have been falsely
implicated. A written statement was filed on behalf of the appellant
under Section 315 CrPC. However, neither any oral evidence was
led, nor any document was exhibited on his behalf in defence. The
plea taken by the appellant in the written statement was that he
returned from his office on 7th February, 2017 at about 5:00 a.m.
On the same day, the police officials came to his house at about
7:30 a.m. and questioned him and his family members for about 30
minutes. Thereafter, between 11:00 a.m. and 12 noon, an inspector
came to his house and took him to the police station where, he was
kept confined and was forced to sign blank papers and was then
remanded to judicial custody.
14. The trial Court upon appreciating the arguments advanced by the
Public Prosecutor and the defence counsel and upon analysing
the oral and documentary evidence available on record, found the
appellant guilty for the charges framed under Sections 302, 201,
363, 366 and 354-B of the IPC and Section 8 read with Section
7 and Section 6 read with Section 5(m) of the POCSO Act and
sentenced him as noted above, vide judgment of conviction and
order of sentence dated 19th February, 2017.
15. Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred an appeal under Section
374(2) CrPC to the High Court challenging his conviction and
33
 Hereinafter, referred to as 'Investigation Officer (PW-30)'.
[2025] 10 S.C.R.
599
Dashwanth v. State of Tamil Nadu
sentences awarded to him whereas, a reference was forwarded
by the trial Court under Section 366 CrPC to the High Court, for
confirmation of the death sentence awarded to the appellant. The
appeal filed by the appellant was rejected and the reference was
answered in the affirmative by the High Court vide common judgment
dated 10th July, 2018 which is the subject matter of challenge in the
present appeals by special leave.
SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT: -
16. Learned counsel for the appellant, vehemently and fervently contended
that the entire case of the prosecution is false and fabricated. The
prosecution story is full of improbabilities and loopholes. The evidence
of the material prosecution witnesses is flimsy and does not inspire
confidence. The conduct of the witnesses is highly suspicious which
makes their testimony doubtful and unworthy of credence. The
conduct of Murugan @ Venkata Murugan Guna (PW-3)34, the alleged
witness of the last seen together circumstance, is highly unnatural
inasmuch as, in spite of claiming to have seen the victim playing
with the appellant on the second floor of the same building where
the complainant (PW-1) used to reside, he never divulged the said
fact either to the father of the victim or to the police officers, who had
reached the area soon after the victim was reported missing. It is the
admitted case of the prosecution that after the parents of the victim
raised a hue and cry regarding their daughter having gone missing,
an extensive search operation was launched. The appellant also
participated in the search efforts, and he remained with the search
party till 4:00 a.m. in the morning of 6th February, 2017. It was, thus,
submitted that the evidence of Murugan (PW-3), the sole witness of
the last seen together circumstance cannot be relied upon.
17. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that Murugan (PW-3),
the self-proclaimed witness of last seen together circumstance
claimed that he had seen the victim playing with the appellant on
the second floor of the building. Had there been an iota of truth in
this version then in the natural course of events, he would have
immediately disclosed this fact to the parents of the victim, and an
immediate attempt would have been made to search the second
34
 Hereinafter, referred to as 'Murugan (PW-3)'.
600
[2025] 10 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
floor of the building including the flat of the appellant. However, no
such effort was made by the search party or the police officers which
completely discredits the theory put forth by Murugan (PW-3) that
he had seen the victim in the company of the appellant soon before
her disappearance.
18. It was further submitted that the recoveries allegedly made at the
instance of the appellant were planted and fabricated and hence,
unbelievable. The appellant was apprehended by police officials
on 7th February, 2017, and was kept in illegal custody at the police
station, where he was forced to sign several blank papers and
that, the recoveries were planted to provide padding to the false
prosecution narrative.
19. Learned counsel referred to the examination-in-chief of the
complainant (PW-1) to urge that the victim was seen playing with her
friends, by her mother at 6:00 p.m. on 5th February, 2017. Immediately
thereafter, both the parents left to buy vegetables. They returned
home inside of an hour but did not see their child around, on which
the search efforts were commenced. Thus, there was only a gap of
one hour in which the entire incident is stated to have taken place.
20. Learned counsel submitted that since the search was commenced
within an hour of the victim having gone missing, there was practically
neither enough time nor any possibility for the appellant to subject
the child victim to rape and to have disposed of the dead body of
the victim in the time and manner as alleged by the prosecution. He
pointed out that the prosecution has surmised that the appellant after
committing the ghastly crime, concealed the victim's body in a bag;
carried it down two flights of stairs; took it to the petrol pump on his
motorcycle; purchased petrol and then carried the body to a remote
location before setting it ablaze. He submitted that this sequence of
events put forth by the prosecution is totally unbelievable and could
not have been completed in the small window of about an hour. It
was emphasised with reference to the evidence of the complainant
(PW-1) and Sridevi (PW-2) that right from the inception, the appellant
was participating in the search and remained with the search party
till 4:00 a.m. in the morning of 6th February, 2017.
21. Attention of the Court was drawn to the version of the complainant
(PW-1), i.e., the father of the victim wherein he alleged that previously,
the victim had made a complaint to her mother that the appellant
[2025] 10 S.C.R.
601
Dashwanth v. State of Tamil Nadu
indulged in pinching her cheeks and also used to kiss her. It was
contended that looking at the said previous conduct, it is impossible
to believe that the suspicion of the parents would not have shifted
on to the appellant once the information regarding the victim having
gone missing was received.
22. Learned counsel further contended that looking at this past history
as referred to supra and the fact that Murugan (PW-3), being the
member of the search party, claimed to have seen the child victim
playing with the appellant on the second floor of the same building,
the immediate and natural reaction of the witnesses would have
been to make a search on the second floor as well as inside the
flat of the appellant. Learned counsel contended that a theory tried
to be built up by the prosecution witnesses claiming that the flat of
the appellant was found locked and hence, it could not be searched,
does not hold water when it is seen that the material prosecution
witnesses, namely, the complainant (PW-1) and Sridevi (PW-2)
themselves admitted that the appellant was also assisting them in
the search till 4:00 a.m. in the morning of 6th February, 2017.
23. He further submitted that if at all, Murugan (PW-3) had actually seen
the child playing with the appellant on the second floor and soon
thereafter, a hue and cry was raised regarding the child having gone
missing, then the said witnesses would have immediately divulged
the said information to the complainant (PW-1) being the father of
the child victim. In this scenario, the police personnel who arrived at
the spot would also have been, instantaneously sounded about the
gravely suspicious circumstance thereby putting everyone at guard
regarding the conduct of the appellant and the finger of suspicion
would have turned towards him at the first instance. Had there been
an iota of truth in these allegations, the family members and the police
officials would never have permitted the appellant to participate in the
search efforts and further they would have immediately proceeded
to search the second floor of the building and particularly, the flat of
the appellant. If such an exercise had taken place, the same would
have immediately exposed the circumstances prevailing at the alleged
crime scene and would have provided an important lead for further
investigation. It was also submitted that the entire set of incriminating
circumstances and recovered articles have been subsequently planted
by the police officials for oblique motives.
602
[2025] 10 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
24. Learned counsel further urged that the prosecution case regarding
the appellant having purchased petrol in the bottles is false and
unsubstantiated. The recovery of the blue bag with the undergarment
of the victim is clearly planted because when the initial observation
mahazar (Exhibit P-4) was prepared by the police officers pursuant
to the alleged disclosure statement of the appellant, the presence of
the said bag was not mentioned in the memorandum. It was further
submitted that the Investigating Officer (PW-29) did not prove the
disclosure statements of the appellant as per law and hence the
recoveries pale into insignificance.
25. It was also contended that the body of the victim had already been
discovered much prior to the disclosure statement of the appellant
being recorded which fact is evident from the testimony of the
complainant (PW-1), i.e., the father of the victim. Thus, the discovery
of the body cannot be treated as having been made in pursuance
of the disclosure statement of the appellant.
26. It was also submitted that not only is the recovery of the ornaments
suspicious but, in addition thereto, there is a grave doubt in the manner
in which the identification proceedings of these articles were held.
27. Learned senior counsel vehemently urged that there has been a failure
of a fair trial in this case inasmuch as the appellant was hardly given
any opportunity to defend himself in the case. The charge was framed
against the appellant on 24th October, 2017 and the calendar for the
summoning of the witnesses was finalised on 20th November, 2017.
However, compliance with the mandatory requirement of Section
207 CrPC, i.e., providing copies of the relied upon documents to the
accused, was ensured only on 13th December, 2017 and just four
days thereafter, the prosecution evidence was commenced. Thus,
as per the learned counsel, the entire procedure adopted by the trial
Court right from the framing of charges to recording of evidence of
the prosecution witnesses is hasty and vitiated and tantamounts to
denial of fair trial inasmuch as the trial Court proceeded to frame
charges against the appellant without providing the relied upon
documents to him as mandated by law and thus, the subsequent
proceedings would be automatically vitiated.
28. He further contended that the appellant was unrepresented in the trial
proceedings and requested for the services of a legal aid counsel.
It was, for the first time, on 13th December, 2017, the trial Court
[2025] 10 S.C.R.
603
Dashwanth v. State of Tamil Nadu
appointed a legal aid counsel to represent the appellant in the trial
proceedings. The documents under Section 207 CrPC were supplied
on the same day and without giving any time for preparation to the
legal aid counsel; the evidence of the prosecution was commenced
from 18th December, 2017, i.e., within 4 days of the legal aid counsel
being appointed, and evidence of as many as 30 witnesses was
completed within one month and sixteen days. He further submitted
that the judgment of conviction was pronounced on 19th February,
2018 and on the very same day, the trial Court proceeded to pass
the sentence of death penalty against the appellant, which is in gross
contravention to the tenets of fair trial and the sentencing principles
as consistently laid down by this Court. To fortify these assertions,
learned counsel placed reliance on the judgments of this Court in
the cases of Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab35, Santa Singh v.
State of Punjab36, Allauddin Mian and Ors. v. State of Bihar37,
Malkiat Singh v. State of Punjab38, and Dattaraya v. State of
Maharashtra39.
29. On these grounds, learned counsel for the appellant implored the
Court to accept the appeals, set aside the conviction of the appellant,
and acquit him of the charges levelled against him.
30. Without prejudice to the above, learned counsel representing the
appellant urged that the incident took place way back in the year
2017, and the appellant has already been incarcerated in prison for
almost 8 years. Neither the trial Court nor the High Court undertook the
mandatory exercise of procuring the report in respect of aggravating
and mitigating circumstances; no effort was made to get conducted
the psychological evaluation of the appellant; and to get a report
about the conduct of the appellant in jail before passing the order
of sentence. The entire sentencing exercise was completed by the
trial Court on the very same day on which the judgment of conviction
was pronounced. Hence, the capital punishment awarded to the
appellant is totally vitiated since the sentencing exercise was a mere
formality and no proper opportunity was provided to the appellant
35
1983 (1) SCR 145.
36
(1976) 4 SCC 190.
37
(1989) 3 SCC 5.
38
(1991) 4 SCC 341.
39
(2020) 14 SCC 290.
604
[2025] 10 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
in the said process. He, thus, submitted that in case, the conviction
of the appellant is upheld, he deserves leniency on the aspect of
the sentence.
SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT-STATE: -
31. Per contra, learned senior counsel representing the State, vehemently
and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the appellant's
counsel. He urged that Murugan (PW-3) had no reason to falsely
implicate the appellant. His statement to the effect that the victim
was playing with the appellant on the second floor of the building is
absolutely truthful and constitutes unimpeachable evidence in support
of the circumstance of last seen together which has been established
against the appellant beyond all manner of doubt. Immediately
thereafter, the child victim went missing. Hence, the onus would shift
onto the accused to explain the circumstances under which the child
victim was found murdered and her body burnt.
32. He further submitted that the burnt dead body of the victim was
recovered in furtherance of the disclosure statement of the appellant
for which he has offered no explanation whatsoever.