Court Upholds Conviction Based on Circumstantial Evidence Including CCTV, DNA, and Medical Reports; Death Penalty Deemed Justified in Rarest of Rare Case
In a landmark judgment dated February 6, 2026, the Karnataka High Court (Division Bench) upheld the conviction and confirmed the death sentence awarded to accused Nos. 1 to 3—Jaiban Adivasi, Mukesh Singh, and Manish Thirki—for the heinous gang rape and murder of a minor girl aged approximately 7 years and 7 months. The trial pertained to a tragic incident that occurred on November 21, 2021, at the Raj Tiles Factory premises in Mangaluru, where the accused conspired and committed brutal sexual assault followed by the murder of the victim.
The prosecution’s case, primarily based on circumstantial evidence, was meticulously examined by the Court. This included the "last seen" theory, recovery of blood-stained clothes and chikki (a sweet) allegedly given to the victim by the accused, CCTV footage capturing the presence and movements of the accused in the factory premises, and forensic evidence such as DNA and blood group tests. Medical and post-mortem reports confirmed extensive injuries consistent with brutal sexual assault and death due to throttling (manual strangulation).
The Court reaffirmed the five golden principles for conviction based on circumstantial evidence as laid down in the Supreme Court’s precedent in Sharad Birdichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra (1984), emphasizing that the chain of circumstances must be complete and exclude every other hypothesis except guilt. The evidence was found to satisfy these conditions beyond reasonable doubt, conclusively establishing the accused’s guilt.
Despite the accused’s youth and lack of prior convictions, the Court held that these mitigating factors were insufficient to reduce the sentence. The case was classified under the "rarest of rare" category due to the extreme depravity, inhuman conduct, and betrayal of social trust involved in the crime. The judgment drew upon multiple Supreme Court rulings and recent amendments to the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, underscoring the legislature’s intent to impose stringent punishments for crimes against minors.
Accused No.4 absconded during trial and was excluded from the sentencing order, with the trial against him to continue separately. The High Court’s ruling dismisses the appeals filed by the accused challenging their conviction and sentence, thereby affirming the death penalty. The Registry was directed to inform the accused of their right to appeal to the Supreme Court.
This judgment sends a strong message against crimes targeting vulnerable children and highlights the judiciary’s commitment to uphold justice in the face of grave offenses.
Bottom Line:
The conviction and death sentence of accused Nos.1 to 3 for gang rape and murder of a minor girl aged about 7 years 7 months were confirmed.
Statutory provision(s): Indian Penal Code Sections 120B, 366A, 376(A)(D), 377, 302, 201, 34; Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Sections 5, 6; Code of Criminal Procedure Section 366
