Patna High Court acquits man sentenced to death based on sniffer dog evidence in gang rape, murder case

The Patna High Court recently set aside the death penalty awarded to a man for the murder and rape of a 12-year-old girl, after finding that the prosecution’s entire case rested only on the fact that a sniffer dog had entered the accused man's house [The State of Bihar v. Amar Kumar]..The division bench of Justices Ashutosh Kumar and Alok Kumar Pandey slammed the trial court for the way it had handled the case and sentenced the accused to death “without caring for the basic principles of the law."The Court opined that the judicial dispensation “can ill-afford” such heavy reliance on the expertise of a sniffer dog.The Court demanded how the trial court could have presumed that the dog would not have made a mistake in entering the house of the accused, considering the fact that there was evidence of it having entered another person’s house as well..The Court acknowledged the advantages of the olfactory sense (sense of smell) of the dogs and the assistance sniffer dogs provide to cops. However, it held that even if a sniffer dog’s assistance could be a starting point for the police probe, it cannot be received “as an evidence so strong as for the trial court not to need any corroborative evidence."“This (sniffer dog evidence) cannot be an evidence, much less strong evidence unless the Court examines the reliability of the dog skills, its past patterns of performance or its handler’s capabilities. It cannot ever be taken as a reliable pointer towards the commission of an offence at the hands of an offender," the Court added. .In the case dating back to 2019, the minor girl was gang raped and murdered near a temple when she along with her grandmother went to witness a fair organised on the occasion of the Nagpanchami festival.A day later, when the dead body of the victim was found, the Police brought in a sniffer dog who is stated to have first smelled the dead body and then moved into a villager’s house. After nothing incriminating was found there, the dog entered the house of the accused. The accused was arrested after he was allegedly found locked inside his room. The door had to be forced open following which he was apprehended by the Police, the Court was told. After investigation, the accused was chargesheeted under provisions pertaining to the offences of murder and gang rape. In October 2021, the trial court convicted him and sentenced him to be hanged by the neck till death. He moved an appeal before the High Court challenging this verdict..After examining other evidence against the accused, the Court noted that four pairs of slippers, a purse and a chain had been found at the place where the dead body was recovered.It said that the investigating agency “jumped to the conclusion” that one of the slippers belonged to the accused. From his house, a pair of soiled jeans was also recovered, which the Court said was “surprisingly” never sent for any forensic examination.“We also do not find any record of the appellant having been put to medical test under Section 53A of the Code of Criminal Procedure. May be for these reasons, the appellant was granted bail during the investigation by the High Court,” it added.The Court censured the trial court for convicting the accused on the basis of such evidence, and opined that the circumstances in the case are “either no circumstances in the eyes of law” or are factually incorrect..On delving deeper into the evidence, the Court found nothing on record to prove that the slippers found near the dead body belonged to the accused or that he had worn them on the date of occurrence. On the blood droplets stated to have been seen on the dead body, the Court noted that there was no reference to it in the inquest report prepared on the spot. The Court also took a critical view of the trial court’s reliance on the recovery of jeans and said that the trial court “perhaps forgot” that nobody had identified or confirmed that the dress was worn by the accused to the fair. “In fact, one of the witnesses to the seizure list has specifically stated that only the appellant was arrested from his house after the sniffer dog had entered, but nothing else was recovered from that place. The witnesses to the seizure have, in unison, stated that they had signed on a plain piece of paper,” the judgement read..After looking into the post-mortem report, the Court also expressed doubt over whether the dead body examined by the doctor belonged to the victim in this case as the report did not make mention of any examination of the victim's genitalia.“We say so for the reasons that normally in a case of suspected rape/ rape, the first and foremost effort of the Doctor is to examine the genitals. No injury was found on the entire body of the deceased,” the High Court explained.The Court also rejected the prosecution's arguments on the guilt of the accused based on him being found locked inside a room at the time of arrest. “Even if the appellant were found inside the room, it would be absolutely naive to give any hard and fast rule having any universal application, with regard to reaction of a person in a given circumstance,” the Court opined.In view of the above, High Court set aside the conviction and declined to confirm the death penalty.After the counsel representing the appellant said that he was in jail, the High Court also ordered his immediate release..Advocate Krishna Chandra represented the appellant (accused).Additional Public Prosecutor Abhimanyu Sharma represented the State..[Read Judgment]