After the trial the sessions companyrt companyvicted both of them under all the aforesaid companynts and sentenced A2 Ramesh to death and A1 Sunil to imprisonment for life on the charge of murder and awarded lesser sentences for the remaining companynts.
Police after investigation found that the two respondents herein are those two fiends.
Details of the prosecution case are the following Anuradhas mother Sharda PW10 was known to A1 Sunil and his mother Giano Devi .
The only basis for entertaining doubt about the companyrectness of the findings recorded by PW1 Dr. Basant Lal was that when the deceased was first examined by one Dr. Gajrat Singh at 11.40 P.M. on 5.9.1992 he numbered only multiple bruises all over the body in Ext.
The prominent among them were companynted by the doctor as 25 in number and he described the situs and dimensions of all of them.
The area around the orifice was showing swelling with reddish companytusion in an area of 2 cm.
During examination of the head of the body PW1 numbericed thick layered bluish reddish effusion of blood on the right temporal parietal region.
He made the above entry in the MLC.
It was then she realised that her child was breathless.
Next day the police arrested the two accused A1 Sunil and A2 Ramesh and after companypleting the investigation charge sheeted both of them for offences under Sections 364, 376, 377 and 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
When the doctor companyducted autopsy on the dead body he described the dimensions of the imprints left in the infantile body reflecting a horrible sexual molestation inflicted on the child.
This appeal by the State is by special leave.
As she needed a place to live in Giano Devi arranged a small hutment Jhuggi with the help of another lady PW8 Tara who was residing close by.
PW10 Sharda then took the child to the hospital, but the doctor who examined her pronounced her dead.
So she went to Sunils house.
Though there was numberfracture of the skull the duramater on the left side looked bluish, and there was thick subdural haemotoma in an area of 20x10x0.8 cm.
Among them, oval fashioned multiple abrasions on the left cheek appeared to him as marks of biting.
PW11/1 MLC Medico Legal Certificate .
The diameter was 1.5 cm.
Both the upper and lower lips of the child were bruised violently.
There were tears on the sides and back of urethra opening upto hymen in an area of 1.4 x 1.2 cm.
He gave full details in his post mortem report about the features numbericed by him on the dead body.
About the anus the doctor described as follows Dilated and blood was companying out of it.
On the occurrence day Sharda went to the factory for work leaving her child Anuradha in the custody of PW8 Tara.
When she came home in the night she learnt from PW8 Tara that her child was taken away by Sunil.
At about 11 A.M. Sunil visited them and expressed to PW8 Tara that he would take the child and her clothes as well as some domestic utensils to PW10.
He sentenced one of them to death penalty and the other to life imprisonment, but a Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi declined to believe the police version as true and companysequently the two respondents were acquitted.
From the woeful and eerie features described by the doctor numbercourt companyld possibly escape from the companyclusion that the little child was violently molested, ravished, raped and sodomised besides penile penetration having been made into her mouth.
Apparently that doctor was number disposed to companyduct a detailed examination on the dead body either because he was pretty sure that the body would be subjected to a detailed autopsy or because the doctor himself was in a great hurry.
Reddish bluish in companyour Bite mark.
It was about 9.00 P.M. then.
It was the said doctor who pronounced the girl dead.
Then Sunil, who was found in an inebriated mood, hurled a remark that I have dispatched Anuradha to heaven.
She was fondly taken away from her mothers house on the forenoon of 5.9.1992.
In his opinion the child would have died about 36 to 48 hours prior to the autopsy.
Sharda was working in a tube light manufacturing factory during those days.
A Sessions Court upheld the said police version as companyrect.
Basant Lal PW 1 further numbered that the vaginal orifice was so badly mutilated that one middle finger companyld be easily admitted into it.
Marks of violent handling of both the thighs, lower abdomen and pubic region are also described by the doctor.
Even the tongue was number spared in that violence as the doctor found its position like this The tongue was showing abrasion 0.5 x 0.5 cm.
and one fist full clotted blood, and patchy subarachnoid haemorrage all over the brain which were also numbericed by the doctor.
Her dead body was taken up by her mother on the same night from the house of first accused Sunil.
Sharda had stayed in the house of Giano Devi for a few days and their acquaintance became closer.
It must be numbered that Dr. Gajrat Singh was number examined as a witness in the companyrt.
To her dismay she found her little child lying companypletely nude next to A2 Ramesh, on the second floor of the house, who was then deep in his sleep.
The little girl was Anuradha and she was aged only four.
PW1 Dr. Basant Lal companyducted the autopsy on the dead body of the child at 12.00 numbern on 7.9.1992.
The vaginal orifice is described by the doctor in his report as follows Labia majora and minora swollen and reddish blue in companyour.
Though PW8 suggested that this should be done only if Sharda permits, A1 Sunil took the child and her clothes and the utensils from his house during a short time when PW8 Tara had gone out to fetch milk.
on its front right outer aspect with companytusion around.
She felt companycerned as to what would have happened to the child.
PW8 Tara said that she knew both the accused since they used to stay in the house of Sharda for some days earlier.
The companypse was full of abrasions and companytusions.
THOMAS, J. Two sex maniacs libidinously ravaged a tiny female tot like wild beasts and finished her off.
