The High Court of Chhattisgarh has confirmed the life imprisonment of three men convicted for the gang rape and murder of a woman in Balod district. The court said that DNA evidence, if properly collected and supported by other material, is enough to prove guilt even when there are no eyewitnesses.
A division bench led by Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha dismissed the criminal appeals filed against the trial court’s decision. The trial court had convicted Kamalnarayan Sahu, Kamlesh Kumar Shrivas, and Uttam Kumar Rawate for house trespass, gang rape, murder, and criminal conspiracy, and had ordered that all life sentences run together.
The incident took place on June 12, 2021, in village Kosmi under Daundilohara police station. The woman was found dead inside her house after she did not respond in the morning. Her body was lying face down on a cot, partially unclothed, with her hands tied behind her back. Doctors later confirmed that she had been sexually assaulted and died due to suffocation caused by smothering.
During the investigation, forensic teams collected semen from vaginal swabs and bloodstains from items found at the scene, including a pillow. DNA tests conducted at the State Forensic Science Laboratory in Raipur matched the samples with all three accused. The DNA of one accused was also directly found in the vaginal samples of the victim.
Before the High Court, the defence argued that the case was based only on circumstantial evidence and that DNA samples were unreliable. They claimed that proper procedures were not followed, the crime scene was not secured, and the chain of custody was broken, raising the risk of contamination. They also pointed out that there were no eyewitnesses.
The court rejected these arguments. It held that the prosecution had followed proper forensic procedures and that the samples were sealed, recorded, and transferred correctly. The defence failed to show any real proof of tampering or contamination.
The bench also relied on medical evidence, which clearly showed that the victim was sexually assaulted just before her death and that the death was homicidal. The court said that although the case was based on circumstances, all the links clearly pointed to the guilt of the accused.
Referring to Supreme Court judgments, the High Court said that DNA evidence is a strong and reliable form of proof when handled legally, and the absence of eyewitnesses does not weaken such cases.
Finding no legal error in the trial court’s judgment, the High Court upheld the convictions and life sentences. The appeals were dismissed, and the accused were told that they may approach the Supreme Court if they wish to challenge the decision further.