DHANANJOY CHATERJEE V.

STATE OF WEST BENGAL,

1994, S.C.

Facts of the case

 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,
Dhananjoy 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.
 On 2nd March, 1990, Hetal (deceased) complained 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 behavior of the appellant towards their daughter, who in turn complained
to Shyam Karmakar and requested him to replace the appellant.
 At the asking of Shyam Karmakar, who came to meet Nagardas in his flat in that
connection, he gave a written complaint also and the appellant was transferred
and a transfer order posting the appellant at ‘Paras Apartment’ was issued by
Shyam. Bijoy Thapa, a security guard at Paras Apartment was posted in his place,
at Anand Apartment. The transfer was to take effect from March 5, 1990.
 As per their normal routine, 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 March 5, 1990. Bhawesh returned to the flat at
about 11.30 a.m. and after taking his meals, left for his father’s place of business
as was his routine. The deceased returned to her flat after taking her
examination at about 1 p.m.
 Yashmoti, the mother of the deceased used to visit Laxmi Narayan Mandir
between 5 and 5.30 p.m. daily. As usual, on the date of the occurrence also she
left for the Temple at about 5.20 p.m. Hetal deceased was all alone in the flat at
that time. Shortly after Yashmoti, the mother of the deceased left for the
Temple, the appellant met Dasarath Murmu, another security guard who was at
that time on duty at the building and told him that he was going to Flat No. 3-
A for contacting his office over the telephone. The appellant used the lift to go
to the said flat and committed the alleged crimes.
 At about 6.05 p.m. Yashmoti returned from the Temple. On reaching her flat,
she rang the bell repeatedly but there was no response and nobody opened
the door. She raised alarm which attracted several of her neighbors. They also
rang the bell and knocked at the door but there was no response. Eventually,
the lock of the door was broken open by the neighbors, their servant and the
 liftman, and as she entered the flat along with some of her neighbors, she found
the door of her bedroom open.
 Yashmoti 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 Dhananjoy
Chatterjee for proving his innocence was also rejected by the Calcutta High
court and thereafter by the Supreme Court.

ISSUES IN DHANANJOY CHATERJEE V. STATE OF

WEST BENGAL
1. Whether the Appellant Was the Assailant Who Had Raped and Murdered The
Defenseless Young Girl?

2. Whether the Appellant Had A Motive To Commit The Alleged Crime?

3. Whether the Case Falls Under the Rarest Of The Rare Cases?

4. Whether This Case Establishes the Statement Of Circumstantial Evidence To Be

Admissible In The Court Of Law?

ARGUMENTS:
ISSUE I

Whether The Appellant Was The Assailant Who Had Raped And Murdered The
Defenseless Young Girl?

PROSECUTION’S ARGUMENTS:

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
every time 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 fiat 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
appellant’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. The
counsels strictly relied upon the evidences which were collected from the crime scene
and also the fact that appellant used to tease the deceased was one of the main
arguments laid down during the proceedings.

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 and he was not present at the place of incident when this event took
place.

ISSUE II

Whether The Appellant Had A Motive To Commit The Alleged Crime?

PROSECUTION’S ARGUMENTS:

The counsel for Prosecution stated that 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 on a number of occasions, the latest in the series
being on 2.3.1990. Yashmoti informed her husband Nagardas about the complaints.
From the testimony of Nagardas, it transpires that after he came to know about the
misbehaviour of the appellant from his wife on 2.3.1990, he called some other dwellers
of the Apartment to apprise them of the same. Mahendra Chauhatia and Harish
Vakharia have deposed that they had been called by Nagardas who reported to them
that the appellant had been teasing his daughter and that he had suggested that the
appellant should be replaced by another security guard. They both agreed. The
testimony of new security guard has remained totally unchallenged in cross-
examination. After consulting Nagardas the employer of the appellant, to meet him
and according to the statement of Karmakar he came to the flat of Nagardas on
3.3.1990, where he was informed about the teasing of his daughter by the appellant,
deposed that Nagardas told him to replace the appellant by another security guard
and even handed over a written complaint.

APPELLANT’S ARGUMENTS:
The counsel for the defendant argued that the delay in the seizure of complaint and
the transfer order, on 29.6.1990 were indicative of the fact that both the documents
had come into existence subsequently as an afterthought.

ISSUE III

Whether The Case Falls Under The Rarest Of The Rare Cases?

PROSECUTION’S ARGUMENTS:

This case was of the nature of ‘rarest of the rare cases’ because in this case the
deceased had been killed very severely and mercilessly by the security guard whose
duty was to protect. So, the appellant must be awarded capital punishment.

APPELLANT’S ARGUMENTS:

The counsel for Appellant followed that the case does not fall under the category of
‘rarest of the rare cases’ because these kinds of crime are very obvious these days and
in most of these crimes the capital punishment is not awarded to the culprit.

BRIEF ANALYSIS OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE WITH REFERENCE TO

ISSUE IV:

According to Indian Evidence Act, 1872, circumstantial evidence is also known as

indirect evidence. It relates to a series of facts other than the particular fact sough to
be proved it is the evidence that is drawn not from direct observation of the fact at
issue but from events or circumstances surround it is a proof of a fact which tends to
prove whether something is true or not. It is usually a theory supported by a significant
quantity of corroborating evidence. This kind of evidence is important because nearly
all the criminal are careful not to generate direct evidence and they try to avoid
demonstrating criminal intent. Therefore to prove mens rea, the prosecution resorts to
circumstantial evidence.

The well known rule governing circumstantial evidence is that each and every
incriminating circumstance must be clearly established by reliable evidence and the
circumstances proved must be from the chain of events from which the only irresistible
conclusion about the guilt of the accused can be safely drawn and no other hypothesis
against the guilt is possible.

JUDGMENT: DHANANJOY CHATERJEE V. STATE OF

WEST BENGAL
SUPREME COURT ON ISSUE 1
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 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, has nothing been pointed out as to why any of the witness for the
prosecution should have falsely implicated the appellant in such a heinous crime. 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 of IPC.

SUPREME COURT ON ISSUE 2

The Supreme Court did not find any force in the submission of appellant. Nagardas
who gave a written complaint to Shyam Karmakar and delivered the transfer order to
the appellant were not challenged in the cross-examination about the same. Even the
investigating officer was not asked for an explanation as to why the documents had
been seized so late. In any event the seizure of the documents on 29.6.1990, after the
appellant had been arrested only a couple of weeks earlier would not go to show that
the documents were either fabricated or were an afterthought. His transfer from
‘Anand Apartment’ on the allegation that he had teased the deceased, therefore,
provided sufficient motive for him not only to satisfy his lust and teach a lesson to the
deceased girl for spurning his offer but also as a measure of retaliation for being
reported to his employer and being transferred from Anand Apartment to Paras
Apartment on the basis of the said complaint. The transfer of the appellant on grounds
of his improper behavior with the deceased was an aspersion on his character and that
appears to have provided him the immediate motive for committing the crime in
retaliation and even may be to remove the evidence of committing rape on the
deceased. The court, therefore, is of the opinion that the prosecution has successfully
established the existence of motive on the part of the appellant to commit the crime.

SUPREME COURT ON ISSUE 3

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 defenseless 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.
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 defenseless school-going girl of 18 years. 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 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.

SUPREME COURT ON ISSUE 4

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 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. 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. We are, 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 we, therefore,
uphold his conviction for the offences under Sections 302, 376 and 380 IPC.