The Investigating Officer further admitted that
the victim and her father were taken to Jaipur, and
that a sketch was prepared for the purpose of
identifying the accused. However, he admitted that
the said sketch was not available with him and had
not been produced before the trial Court. This
circumstance assumes considerable significance, as
the sketch, having been prepared with the assistance
of the victim at an early stage of the investigation,
constituted an important corroborative material for
ascertaining the identity and physical features of the
then unknown assailant. The non-production of the
said sketch deprives the Court of an opportunity to
examine whether the description furnished by the
victim at the earliest stage was consistent with the
physical features of the accused-appellant. {Para 31}
32. Hence, it is safe to conclude that the
Investigating Officer had no reliable evidence which
could point the finger of suspicion towards the
accused-appellant as being the perpetrator of the
crime. Thus, there remains a serious doubt regarding
the basis on which the accused-appellant came to be
arrested and his subsequent identification as the
assailant.
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). 135 OF 2026
DHANRAJ Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Author: Mehta, J.
Dated: SEPTEMBER 07, 2026.
Citation: 2026 INSC 958.
Read full judgment here: Click here.
Print Page