The Allahabad High Court recently acquitted a man who was convicted for the attempted rape and murder of a 100-year-old woman seven years ago. The bench of Justices Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Dr. Gautam Chowdhary overturned the trial court’s judgment which awarded the accused life imprisonment. It overturned his conviction on the grounds of lack of independent witnesses and the absence of confirmation of rape and murder in the medical report. It noted that the evidence indicated that the deceased died due to ‘septic shock’ and not due to any blow or injury.
Notably, the said incident took place in Meerut on 29th Oct, 2017. At that time, the accused, Ankit Punia, was 24 years old. He was sentenced to life imprisonment by a special court on 20th November, 2020. However, the High Court overturned his conviction on 13th August this year.
Punia was accused of trespassing, attempted rape, and murder. The prosecution had alleged that the elderly woman was too frail to resist and she was assaulted and later died in the hospital. Subsequently, a case was filed under several sections, including provisions of the SC/ST Act.
The two-judge bench heard Punia’s appeal, which argued that the case was fabricated. His lawyer, Arun Deshwal, told the court that the elderly woman’s grandson took Rs 1 lakh as a loan from the accused which he never repaid. His counsel argued that to avoid repaying the loan as well as to secure financial assistance from the government, the informant fabricated a false case and implicated the accused.
Meanwhile, according to the allegations levelled by the informant (Shani Kumar Balmiki), his ailing 100-year-old grandmother was resting on a cot in the verandah of their home. He and his wife were in a nearby room and heard their grandmother, who was in a semi-conscious state, whining. When they rushed there, they found the accused (Ankit Punia) and two fellow villagers sexually assaulting their grandmother.
They also alleged that they had to lift Ankit off their grandmother with great difficulty as the accused appeared to be in an inebriated state. However, when they attempted to nab him, he fled from the scene.
According to the Shani Balmiki, they immediately took his grandmother to the police station via an ambulance and filed a report in this case. Later, the trial court convicted him as it concluded that there was a complete chain of evidence showing that the accused committed the crime.
However, the High Court was told that the informant (Shani Balmiki) had admitted in his testimony that he was living in Ghaziabad with his wife at the time of the incident. Therefore, he couldn’t have been an eyewitness to the alleged incident. It was also submitted that the victim was ill and passed away due to poor health in which the accused had no role to play.
Based on the testimonies, forensic evidence, and medical report, the High Court bench found that there was no sign of rape and murder of the deceased.
The bench also noted the fact that the trial court had expressed its opinion that no sperm or semen was found on any object, nor was there any sign of external injury on the genitals in the medical report of the victim, and that no evidence or signs of penetration by the accused were found.
Consequently, the High Court concluded that the trial court was wrong in assuming that the accused was attempting to commit rape. The Court held that section 376/511 of the IPC against the accused for trying to commit rape was not proved.
The bench also observed that it was probable that the allegations of sexual offence and homicide were made against the accused only to get financial support from the government.
The court observed, “…this fact is credible that the complainant falsely implicated the accused to get the money from the government. Sunny Kumar had falsely implicated the accused by committing a criminal conspiracy because of the money taken from the accused. This is because the prosecution witness No. 1 has admitted in his cross-examination that ‘after the death of my grandmother Phullo Devi, my father and his three brothers had received Rs. 8.25 lakh from the government.’”
