1conf01.

15

C
ou

CRIMINALCONFIRMATIONCASENO.01OF2015

rt

INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJUDICATUREATBOMBAY,
NAGPURBENCH,NAGPUR.

TheStateofMaharashtra,
throughPoliceStationOfficer,
PoliceStation,Parwa,Taluka
Ghatanji,DistrictYavatmal.

...APPELLANT

VERSUS

ig
h

ShatrughnaBabanMeshram,
aged21years,Occupation
Labour,R/oZatala,Taluka
Ghatanji,DistrictYavatmal.

...RESPONDENT

....

ba
y

Smt.BhartiDangre,PublicProsecutorfortheappellant/State.
ShriT.G.Bansod,Advocatefortherespondent.
....
WITH
CRIMINALAPPEALNO.321OF2015

om

ShatrughnaBabanMeshram,
aged21years,Occupation
Labour,R/oZatala,Taluka
Ghatanji,DistrictYavatmal.
(InCentralJail,Nagpur).

...APPELLANT/ACCUSED
VERSUS

TheStateofMaharashtra,
throughPoliceStationOfficer,
PoliceStation,Parwa,Taluka
Ghatanji,DistrictYavatmal.

...RESPONDENT
....

ShriT.G.Bansod,Advocatefortheappellant/accused.
Smt. Bharti Dangre, Public Prosecutor with Shri M.K. Pathan, Additional
PublicProsecutorfortherespondent/State.
....

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:07 :::

rt

2conf01.15

CORAM:B.R.GAVAIAND
PRASANNAB.VARALE,JJ.

C
ou

DATEOFRESERVINGTHEJUDGMENT:29THSEPTEMBER,2015.
DATEOFPRONOUNCINGTHEJUDGMENT:12THOCTOBER,2015.
JUDGMENT:(PerPrasannaB.Varale,J.)

ig
h

TheConfirmationCaseNo.01of2015arisesoutofthereference
bythelearnedAdditionalSessionsJudge,YavatmalinSpecialCase(POCSO
Act) No. 11 of 2013 for confirmation of the death sentence awarded to

originalaccused.

The appellant/original accusedhasalsopreferredthe Criminal

ba
y

2.

Appeal No. 321 of 2015 challenging the judgment and order dated 14 th
August,2015therebyconvictingtheappellantfortheoffencespunishable
underSection302oftheIndianPenalCodeandsentencingtodeath,also

om

convicting for the offence punishable under Section 376A of the Indian
PenalCodeandsentencingtodeath,convictingfortheoffencepunishable

underSection6oftheProtectionofChildrenfromSexualOffencesAct,2012
(POCSO)andsentencingtosufferRigorousImprisonmentforlifeandtopay
fine of Rs.2,000/, in default, to suffer further Rigorous Imprisonment for
threemonths.

3.

Onperusalofthematerialplacedonrecord,theprosecutioncase

emergesasfollows
Ontheunfortunatedayi.e.on11thFebruary,2013,thevictimwho

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:07 :::

3conf01.15

rt

was a child of two years of age, was in the lap of her grandfather. The

C
ou

appellant (original accused) is the son of the cousin brother of the

grandfather of the victim namely Pundlik. The accused approached the
houseofPundlikatabout07:30p.m.Hetoldthegrandfatherthatthefather
ofthevictimisbackfromhisworkandhehasaskedhim(accused)tobring
thevictim.Thegrandfatherofthevictimwasnotinclinedtoallowthechild

ig
h

tobetakenbytheaccusedonthegroundthatthefatherofthevictimisyetto
come from work. In spite of such resistance, the accused took away the
victimwithhim.Thefatherofthevictimhadbeentoattendsomereligious

functioninthetemplenamelyDattaMandir.Onhisreturn,whenhefound
thatthechildwasnotinthehouse,hemadeanenquirywiththegrandfather

ba
y

i.e.Pundlikaboutthechild. Pundlikinformedthattheaccusedtookaway
the child from his house. The father of the victim Maroti, grandfather
PundlikandoneShrawanMeshramproceededforthesearchofthechildin
thevillage.Theyfoundthevictimchildwaslyingatapartiallyconstructed

om

building ofAnganwadi. The accused wasalsolying onthespot. Maroti,

Pundlik and Shrawan found that the victim had received severe injuries

includingbitesonlipsandcheeksandswellingonherprivatepart. They
immediately rushed to the private medical officer Dr. Jafar at Kurli by
arranginganautorickshaw. Dr.Jafardeclaredthatthevictimwasbrought
dead.ThevictimwasthenbroughtbacktovillageZatala.Inthemeantime,
aninformationwasreceivedinthePoliceStationandAPIShriVanjarialong
withhisotherstaffmembersrushedtothevillageZatala.Hesawthedead
bodyofthevictimandtook ittoSubDistrictHospital,Ghatanji. Maroti,
fatherofthevictimlodgedareportatPoliceStation,Parwaandonhisreport,

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:07 :::

4conf01.15

rt

CrimeNo.11/2013wasregistered. Astheinvestigatingagencywassetin

C
ou

motion, Shri Vanjari carried out necessary formalities of the investigation

process,suchas,effectingthearrestoftheaccusedonthenextdayi.e.on
12thFebruary,2013,attendingthespotoftheincidentanddrawingthespot
panchnama.Theclotheswornbythechildvictimwereseizedfromthespot
alongwiththepiecesoffleshandchappaloftheaccusedaswellearthfrom

ig
h

the spot. Accordingly, seizure panchnama was drawn. An inquest

panchnamaofthedeadbodywasalsodrawn.Thedeadbodywasreferredto
postmortemandthenotesofautopsysurgeonwerecollected.Theapparels

wornbytheaccusedwerealsoseized,thesamplesofbloodofthevictim
werealsocollectedandvisceraandtheothermaterialwereforwardedtothe

ba
y

Chemical Analyzer. A request was also made to the Naib Tahsildar to

prepare the mapof the spot. The Investigating Officer also recorded the
statementsofthewitnesses.

om

4.

Oncompletionoftheinvestigationprocess,chargesheetcameto

be filed in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ghatanji.

SincethecasewasexclusivelytriablebythelearnedSessionsJudge,thesame
committedtothelearnedAdditionalSessionsJudge,Yavatmal.Theaccused
waschargedfortheoffencepunishableunderSections376(1)(2)(f)(m),376
A,302oftheIndianPenalCodeandunderSection6oftheProtectionof
ChildrenfromSexualOffencesAct,2012.Theaccusedpleadednotguiltyand
claimedtobetried. Hisdefencewasoftwofolds;oneoftotaldenialand
otherwasoffalseimplicationandthedefencetheoryputupwasthatthe
fatherofthevictimhimselfkilledthevictimsoastopleasetheGoddess.In

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:07 :::

5conf01.15

rt

short,acaseofhumansacrificewasputupbytheaccusedasdefence.The

C
ou

prosecution,initssupport,examined13witnesses.ThelearnedAdditional
Sessions Judge, Yavatmal, on appreciation of the evidence, came to the
conclusionthattheprosecutionwassuccessfulinprovingtheincriminating
circumstances and also successful in establishing chain of proved
circumstanceslendingtonootherconclusionthantheguiltoftheaccused.

ig
h

The learned Sessions Judge thus found that the accused is guilty of the
offenceschargedagainsthimandfurtherfoundthatthecasebeingabrutal
rapeandmurderofhelplessminorvictimchild,thesamefallsinthecategory

of rarest of rare case warranting imposition of death sentence of the

offencepunishableunderSections376Aand302oftheIndianPenalCode.

ba
y

Sincethedeathpenaltywasimposed,thelearnedtrialJudgepreferredthe
mattertothisCourtforconfirmationofthesaidsentence.Theappellantalso
assailed the said finding by way of an appeal assailing the order of
conviction.Both,ConfirmationCaseandtheAppeal,areheardanddecided

om

byustogether.

5.

Smt.BhartiDangre,thelearnedPublicProsecutor,insupportof

thejudgmentand orderpassedbythe learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Yavatmal, submits that the learned Sessions Judge appreciated the oral
evidence as well as the scientific evidence in its proper perspective and
arrivedatajustandproperconclusion.Shefurthersubmitsthatconsidering
thepeculiarfacts, suchasthevictimbeingaminor childandhardly two
yearsofage,subjectedtoabrutalsexualexploitationresultingindeathofthe
childandtheaccusedbeingthematernaluncleofthechild,thisisafitcase

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:07 :::

6conf01.15

rt

wherenolesserpunishmentthanthedeathpenaltycanbeawardedtothe

C
ou

appellant/accused. ThelearnedPPalsoreliesonthevariousjudgmentsof
theApexCourtaswellasthisCourtinsupportofhersubmission.

6.

Percontra,ShriBansod,thelearnedCounselfortherespondent

(originalaccused)submitsthatthelearnedSessionsJudgeutterlyfailedto

ig
h

appreciate the evidence and was swayed away on the superficial

circumstances,suchasthevictimwasachild.ThelearnedCounselfurther
submitsthatasthecaseisbasedonthecircumstances,itwasthefirstand

foremostdutyoftheprosecutiontoestablisheachandeverycircumstance
withclinchingevidenceagainsttheaccused.ShriBansodalsosubmitsthat

ba
y

therearemanymissinglinksintheevidencebroughtbytheprosecution.He
furthersubmitsthatthelearnedSessionsJudgealsofailedtoconsiderthe
defence put up by the appellant/accused. The learned Counsel for the
appellant/accusedthensubmitsthatassumingbutnotadmittingthatthere

om

issomeevidenceagainsttheappellant/accused,thesameisnotsufficient
enough to award a capital punishment to the appellant/accused. Shri

Bansod then submits that the appellant/accused was in his prime youth
when the unfortunate incident took place and it is alleged that the
appellant/accusedistheauthorofthesaidcrime. Consideringthesefacts,
an opportunity ought to have been given to the appellant/accused to
rehabilitate and reform him in his life. In stead of adopting such an
approach, the learned Sessions Judge awarded the death penalty to the
appellant/accused. Thus, it is an alternative submission of the learned
Counselfortheappellant/accusedthattheappellant/accusedbeawardeda

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:07 :::

7conf01.15

7.

C
ou

rt

lesserpunishmentifhispleaofacquittalisnotacceptedbythisCourt.

WiththeassistanceofthelearnedCounsel,wehavegonethrough

the material placed on record. As stated above, the prosecution has

examined 13 witnesses. For better appreciation, we would classify these
witnesses, suchasthewitnesseswhosupporttheprosecutioncaseofthe

ig
h

accused and the deceased last seen together and the dead body of the
deceasedbeingfoundseenthereafter,thepanchwitnesses,thewitnesseson
scientificaspectsandthepolicepersonnelcarryingoutvariousformalitiesof

theinvestigationaswelltheInvestigatingOfficer.

Inthefirstcategoryofwitnesses,PW1MarotiPendor,fatherof

ba
y

8.

the victim, PW2 Pundlik Masram, grandfather of the victim and PW9
ChandrakantBijapwar,ownerofgroceryshopwouldfindtheirplace.PW3
Ravindra Masram and PW4 Raju Dhadewar are the panch witnesses on

om

variouspanchnamas,suchasspotpanchnama,seizureoftheclothesofthe
victim,effectingarrestoftheaccused,seizureoftheclothesoftheaccused,

seizureofvisceraetc.PW5GaneshGhose,PW8RameshYedmeandPW11
PrakashUddhaoraoKshirsagararethepolicepersonnelwhotookpartinthe
processofinvestigation,suchascarrierofdeadbody,carrierofmuddemal
propertyetc. PW12RameshMendheistheNaibTahsildarwhoprepared
themapofthespot.PW13PanjabVanjari,theAPIandistheInvestigating
Officer.PW6Dr.JafarandPW7Dr.LingawararetheMedicalOfficerswho
areonthescientificaspectssuchasmedicalexaminationofthevictimand
medicalexaminationoftheaccused.PW10isDr.Gadgeandthroughthis

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:07 :::

8conf01.15

C
ou

9.

rt

witness,postmortemnotesareproved.

Firstly, we would deal with PW2 Pundlik, grandfather of the

victim child. PW2 Pundlik states that PW1 Maroti is his soninlaw;
whereas Vaishali is his daughter. He further states that the couple was
initially residing at a place TekadiRampur, District Adilabad and four

ig
h

monthspriortotheincident,theyshiftedtoZatalawhereinPW2andhis
familywereresiding. ThecouplestartedresidingnearthehouseofPW2
Pundlik and was doing labour work. He further states that the victim

deceasedSrushtiwasthedaughterofPW1MarotiandVaishali;whereasthe
accusedisthesonofhiscousinbrother.Hethenstatesthaton11thFebruary,

ba
y

2013 at about 07:30 p.m., both the grand daughters namely Srushti and
Drushti were in his lap. The accused came there and informed that the
fatherofSrushtihadcomefromworkandaskedhimtobringSrushti.PW2
Pundlikalsostatesthatinspiteofhisresistanceonaccountthatthefatherof

om

Srushtiwasyettoreturnbackfromhiswork,theaccusedpaidnoheedand
tookawaySrushti.Hefurtherstatesthataftersometime,healongwithhis

wifewenttothehouseofPW1MarotiandaskedastowhetherSrushtiwas
broughttohimbytheaccused.PW1Marotirepliedinnegative.Therefore,
Pundlik,PW1MarotiandoneShrawantooksearchofSrushti. Whenthey
wereontheirwaytowatertank,oneVikasMasraminformedthemthathe
saw accused with Srushti going towards Anganwadi. On receiving this
information, Pundlik, Maroti and Shrawan proceeded to the site of
constructionoftheAnganwadi andonreachingthere, they found Srushti
andaccusedwerelyinginthepremisesofAnganwadi. Hethenstatesthat

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:07 :::

9conf01.15

rt

thejeanspantofSrushtiwaslyingaside;whereasTshirtwasonherperson.

C
ou

HefurtherstatesthattheyfoundSurshtihadsustainedbitingwoundsonher
lips,cheeks,chestandhipandalsofoundthattherewasbleedingfromthe
privatepartofSrushti.HealsostatesthattheyimmediatelytookSurshtito
their house and thereafter immediately she was taken to one Dr. Jafar of
village Kurli. Dr. Jafar declared her dead. Then they came back to their

ig
h

house. Thepolice personnel alsoreachedtheir houseandtook the dead

bodyofSrushtitoGhatanji.Pundlikidentifiedtheaccusedwhowaspresent
intheCourt.PW2Pundlikfurtherstatesaboutdrawinginquestpanchnama

inhispresenceandanotherpanchArvindSidam.Hethenstatesthaton13th
February,2013,hisstatementwasrecordedbythepoliceaswellason08th

ba
y

March,2013intheCourt.

10.

This witness was subjected to crossexamination. An attempt

wasmadetosuggestthatthewitnessisdeposingfalseandalsoanattempt

om

wasmadetosuggestthatthevictimSrushtiwaskilledbyhimfor getting
certainbenefitashumansacrificetopleasetheGoddess. Thewitnesshas

flatly denied this suggestion. Though certain omissions were brought on

record,theseomissionsarenotsufficientenoughtodiscreditthewitnessor
falsifytheversionofthiswitnessonthematerialaspecti.e.theaccusedtook
awaythevictiminspiteofhisresistanceandwithinashortspanoftime,the
victimfoundataplaceandshewassubjectedtoaviolentsexualexploitation
andtheaccusedwaslyingonthespot. Perusaloftheinquestpanchnama
shows that there were bite marks on the cheeks, lips, chest and on the
buttock.

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:07 :::

PW1Marotiisthefatherofthevictim. Marotistatesthatthe

C
ou

11.

rt

10conf01.15

victimchildSrushtiwashisdaughterandshewasoftwoyearsofage. He
deposesthathewasresidinginahousenearthehouseofhisfatherinlaw
PW2 Pundlik and on 11th February, 2013, there was a programme of
MahaprasadinDattaMandirandhehadgonetothetempleatabout07:00

ig
h

p.m.andcamebackabout07:30p.m.Hefurtherstatesthatonfindingthat
Srushtiwasnotinahouse,hemadeenquirywiththefatherinlawPundlik
andhetoldthattheaccusedtookawaySrushtitohishouse. PW1further

statesthatastheaccusedhadnotbroughtSrushtitohim,asearchwastaken
inthevillagebyhimself,hisfatherinlawandoneShrawan.Thenhestates

ba
y

thathesawhisdaughterSrushtilyingonthespoti.e.apartiallyconstructed
buildingofAnganwadiandtheaccusedwasalsolyingthereandthepantof
thechildvictimwasnotonherpersonandthesamewaslyingaside. He
furtherstatesthatitwasajeanspantofbluecolourandtherewerewounds

om

ofbitesonthelipsandcheeksofhisdaughterandswellingonherprivate
part.Healsostatesthathetookthedaughterfromthespottothehouseand

thereafter immediately by arranging an auto rickshaw took her to private

doctoratvillageKurli. Afterexamininghisdaughter,Dr.Jafardeclaredher
dead. Hebroughtbackthedeadbodyofhisdaughtertohishouse. PW1
MarotifurtherstatesthatbyapproachingParwaPoliceStation,helodgedthe
report. On his oral report, offence was registered and a printed FIR was
preparedandthesamebearshissignature.Healsostatesaboutshowingthe
spot to the police personnel, conducting the postmortem and thereafter
handingoverthedeadbodytohimbythepolice. Hethenstatesthathis

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:07 :::

11conf01.15

rt

statementwasrecordedon13th February,2013andheidentifiedthejeans

C
ou

pant(Article1)andTshirt(Article2). Healsoidentifiedtheaccusedwas
presentintheCourt.

12.

Thiswitnesswasalsosubjectedtoadetailedcrossexamination.

Suggestions were given to this witness that the spot namely the said

ig
h

Anganwadiwassurroundedbyvarioushousesanditwasinthemiddleofthe
village. Asuggestionwasalsogiventothiswitnessthathealongwithhis
fatherinlawkilledhisdaughterashumansacrificetopleasetheGoddess

and the accused on coming to know this fact, threatened them to lodge
reportagainstthem. Itwasalsosuggestedthattosavethemselves, PW1

ba
y

MarotilodgedafalsereportagainsttheaccusedandhewasbeatenbyPW1
Maroti and others. These suggestions are flatly denied by the witness.
Certain omissions were brought on record in respect of beating of the

om

accusedbyShrawan,GovardhanandVikas.

13.

Perusal of the version of this witness who was subjected to

detailedcrossexamination,showsthatthiswitnesswasnotatallshattered
andstoodfirmonmaterialaspectsuchasreceivinganinformationfromPW
2PundlikthattheaccusedtookawaythechildSrushtiandthenfindingthe
childlyingonthespot.Healsostoodfirmontheaspectofreachingthespot,
findingthatthejeanspantofthevictimwasnotonherpersonbutwaslying
asideandtheaccusedwasalsolyingthereandmarksofviolenceonthebody
ofthechildvictim.

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:07 :::

12conf01.15
PW9ChandrakantBijapwar,wassoughttobeexaminedonthe

rt

14.

C
ou

aspect of the accused visiting his shop on 11th February, 2013 along with
Srushti and purchasing biscuits and chiwda, however this witness turned
hostile.Itwillbeusefultonotethattothecrossexaminationofthiswitness
bythelearnedAPP,thiswitnessadmitsthathewashavinggoodrelations
withtheaccusedandhisfamilyandalsoadmitsthatonthedayofhiscross

ig
h

examination in the Court, he was accompanied by the relatives of the

accused.

PW3 Ravindra Masram, PW4 Raju Dhadewar, PW5 Ganesh

15.

Ghose,PW8RameshYedmeandPW11PrakashKshirsagararethepanchas

ba
y

andthepolicepersonnel.PW12RameshMendheistheNaibTahsildarwho
preparedthemapofthespot.Theysupportthecaseoftheprosecutionon
the role played by them and nothing damaging could be brought by the

om

defenceintheircrossexamination.

16.

Itwillbeusefultorefertothemedicalevidence.PW6Dr.Jafaris

the medical officer to whom PW1 Maroti and PW2 Pundlik approached
withthevictimchild. Dr.Jafarstatesthaton11th February,2013,whenhe
wasinhisclinic,atabout09:30p.m.to10:00p.m.,threepersonsfromZatala
broughtonegirlchildpatient.Hefurtherstatesthatthechildwaswrapped
in bed sheet, she was aged about 2 and to three years and on her
examination,hefoundthatshewasdead.Therewerewoundsofbitesonher
mouthandthereafterthosepersonstookawayherdeadbody.Healsostates
thatthepolicehadrecordedhisstatement. Inthecrossexamination,Dr.

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:07 :::

13conf01.15

rt

Jafar states that he had not seen the cutting marks on the lips of the

C
ou

deceased.Hefurtherdeposesinthecrossexaminationthathehadseenthe
woundsonthemouthofthedeceasedandmerelyheexaminedtheheart
beatsandpulse.

17.

PW10isDr.Gadgeandheconductedthepostmortem.Hestates

ig
h

thaton12th February,2013,hereceivedarequisitionletterandaletterfor
video shooting of the process of postmortem and also received certain
queries.Hefurtherstatesthatthepostmortemexaminationwasconducted

on 12th February, 2013 between 1505 to 1705 hours along with Dr. Major
Kuchewar,Dr.R.D.Meshram,Dr.R.R.KhetreandDr.L.P.Durgawad. Dr.

ba
y

Gadge.Hethenstatesthathefoundbothupperandlowerlipsweremissing
andtherewasevidenceofperennialtearwithmergingofvaginalandanal
orifice, the details of which were referred in column Nos.17 and 21. He
furtherstatesthatdriedbloodanddriedbloodstainsandfaecalmatterover

om

genitalandperennialregionwerefound,limbswerestraightandhandswere
partlyclenched. Dr.Gadgefurtherstatesabouttheinjuriesfoundonthe

deadbodyasunder:

(1) Multiple abrasions over right zygomatic region of sizes

rangingfrom0.5cmx0.5cmto0.3cmx0.2cmreddish.
(2)

Abrasion over leftuppereyelid ofsize 0.5 cmx0.5cm

reddish.

(3)

Abrasionoverrightcheekofsize4cmx4cmreddish.

(4)

Abrasionoverleftcheekofsize8.5cmx7cmreddish.

(5)

Evidenceofmissingbothupperandlowerlipsexposing

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:07 :::

14conf01.15

rt

labialfatwithcleancutmarginsseenperiorallywithout
bloodinfiltration(postmorteminnature).
Laceratedwoundoverchin,midlineofsize3cmmuscle
deep with tissue missing, margins irregular and blood
infiltratedreddish.

(7)

Bitemarkoverandaroundrightnippleoveraregionof
size5cmx5cm,marginscontusedreddish.

(8)

Bitemarkoverandaroundleftnippleoveraregionofsize
3cmx3cm,marginscontusedreddish.

(9)

Bite mark over abdomen, 1 cm right at the level of

umbilicusoveraregionofsize,4cmx3.5cm,margins
contusedreddish.

ig
h

C
ou

(6)

(10) Bitemarkoverabdomeninthemidline,5cmbelowthe
umbilicus, over a region of size 3 cm x 3 cm, margins
contusedreddish.

ba
y

(11) Bitemarkoverabdomeninthemidline,5cmbelowthe
umbilicus, over a region of size 3 cm x 3 cm, margins
contusedreddish.
(12) Bite mark over lateral aspect of right shoulder, over a
regionofsize5cmx3cm,marginscontusedreddish.

om

(13) Bitemarkoverrightbuttock,overaregionofsize3cmx3
cm,marginscontusedreddish.
(14) Bitemarkoverrightbuttock,overaregionofsize3cmx3
cm, margins contused reddish, separated from injury
No.13by1.5cm.
(15) Bitemarkoverrightbuttock,overaregionofsize3cmx
2.5cm,marginscontused,reddish,separatedfrominjury
No.14by1cm.
(16) Bitemarkoverleftbuttock,overaregionofsize3.7cmx3
cm,marginscontusedreddish.
(17) Multiplelacerationsovervaginalandanalregionmerging
vaginalandanalorifice(perennialtearat3,6and9O'
clock positions), margins irregular, blood infiltrated,
reddish.
(18) Abrasionoverleftkneejointregion,inanterioraspectof
size1cmx0.5cmreddish.

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

rt

15conf01.15

C
ou

PW10Dr.GadgefurtherstatesthattheinjuryNo.6wascausedbynibbling
byteethandinjuryNos.7to16arecausedbyhumanbitesandinjuryNo.17is
caused by forceful sexual assault. He also states that on internal
examination, he found that under scalp contusion over frontoparietal
region of size 6 cm x 5 cm, irregular and reddish and under the scalp

ig
h

contusion over left temporal region of size 2.5 cm x 2 cm, irregular and
reddish. No evidence of fracture to vault and base of skull. Ribs and
cartilagesintactnoinjury.Haemotomaoverleftsideofchestwall,anteriorly

correspondingtoinjuryNo.8undercolumnNo.17ofsize4.5cmx3cmwith
bloodinfiltrationinsurroundtissue,reddish.Dr.Gadgefurtherstatesabout

ba
y

theevidenceoftear(perforation)invictimrectumofsize3cmx2.5cm,
margins irregular with blood infiltration present corresponding to injury
No.17 under column No.17 with evidence of faecal matter coming out
throughthevent. Hethenstatesthattheevidenceoftearintheposterior

om

vaginalwallwithmergingofvaginalandanalcanal(perennialtear)surface
ragged, margins irregular, blood infiltrated and reddish extending and

tearing (perforating) the rectum corresponding to injury No.17 under

columnNo.17. Dr.Gadgethenstatesthatthedeceaseddiedwithinthree
hoursfromlastmeal. Hefurtherstatesthattheviscerawaspreservedand
bloodsoakedgaugedpiecekeptforD.N.A.analysisandcomparisonandskin
andtissuekeptforD.N.A.analysis. Hethenstatesthatthebloodsoaked
gaugedpiecekeptforbloodgroup,nailclippingskeptfordetectionofforeign
bloodgroupandtheskinandtissueskeptforhistopathologicalexamination.
Dr. Gadge then states that the cause of death is shock and haemorrhage

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

16conf01.15

rt

followingperennialtearwithmultipleinjuries. Hefurtherstatesthatthere

C
ou

wasforcefulsexualassaultonthechildandtheinjuryNo.17wascausedby
forceful insertion of penis. PW10 Dr. Gadge further deposes that the
material was sent for histopathological examination and also for DNA
analysistoruleoutwhetheritisofthesamedeceased.Hethensubmitsthat
accordingtotheExh.54,theDNAreportshowstheperfectmatchingthatof

18.

ig
h

deceased.

Thewitnesswassubjectedtocrossexamination.Anattemptwas

madetosuggestthattheinjuriesreferredbythewitnesscouldnothavebeen
caused by teeth bite. An attempt was also made to suggest that the

ba
y

mentioning of injuries in column Nos.21 and 17 is a false opinion of the

witness. Anattemptwasalsomadetosuggestthatattheinstanceofthe
Investigating Officer and the relatives of the complainant, the witness is
giving a false version. The suggestions are flatly denied. Perusal of the

om

evidenceofthiswitnessleavesusnodoubtthatthevictimwassubjectednot

onlytoaforcefulsexualviolationbutabrutalandbeastlymanner.

19.

Theaccusedwasalsosubjectedtomedicalexamination. Itwill

beusefultorefertotheevidenceofPW7Dr.Lingawar.Hestatesthaton12 th
February,2013,whilehewasondutyandwasattachedtoPrimaryHealth
Centre,ParwaandMedicalOfficer,theaccusedwasbrought.Dr.Lingawar,
onexaminationtheaccused,statesthattherewasinjuryofabrasiononthe
tipoftheglanspenisof5mmx3mmsizeandthesaidinjurywascaused
within24hoursandtheaccusedwasfoundcapableforsexualintercourse.

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

17conf01.15

rt

Hefurtherstatesthathecollectedthesampleofblood,pubichair,nailsand

C
ou

thesamplewashandedovertoHeadConstableaftersealingthesame. He
then states that a query letter was issued on 19th February, 2013 to him
throughAPIabouttheinjuryonthepenisoftheaccused.Hefurtherstates
thathehadopinedthatthesignofsexualintercoursewithin24hourswas
present and the injury in the certificate could have been possible due to

20.

ig
h

sexualintercourse.

Thewitnesswassubjectedtocrossexamination. Inthecross

examination,hestatesthattheinjuryofabrasionisasuperficialinjuryand
the healing period depends on the nature of abrasion. Though it was

ba
y

suggested that he wrongly referred the age of injury, the suggestion was
denied.Inthecrossexamination,itisstatedbythewitnessthattheabrasion
couldbepossibleduetosexualintercourseorforsomeotherreasons. A
suggestionwasalsogiventothiswitnessthathehadgivenafalseopinion

om

andissuedfalseinjuryreportattheinstanceoftheInvestigatingOfficerand

thesuggestionwasdenied.

21.

PW3RavindraMasramisthepanchwitness.HestatesthatPSI

VanjarihadcalledhimandoneYadaoTodsamtoactasapanchonthespot.
Thespotpanchnama(Exh.19)preparedbythepolice,bearshissignature.
He further states that the seizure panchnama (Exh.20) also bears his
signature. Hefurtherstatesthatfromthespot, thepolicehadseizedthe
pant,pairofchappal,piecesoffleshandearthfromthespot.Thiswitness
wassubjectedtocrossexamination.Incrossexamination,hestatesthathe

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

18conf01.15

rt

hadnotreceivedsummonsfrompoliceandwascalledinthepoliceStation.

C
ou

Anattemptismadetosuggestthatthepanchnamawasalreadypreparedand
hedeposedfalselyattheinstanceofthefatherofthevictim,heflatlydenied
thesuggestion.

22.

PW5GaneshGhose isthePoliceConstable attachedtoParwa

ig
h

PoliceStationattherelevanttime.Hestatesaboutreceivingthedutypass
forreferringdeadbodyofthevictimtoconductpostmortemalongwithone
questionnaire.ThiswitnessalsodeposesabouttheletterissuedbyPIAmol

Malvetothehospitalauthoritiesforvideoshootingofthepostmortembeing
conducted by the hospital authorities. Then he refers to sealing of the

ba
y

articles,suchasviscera,clothesetc.,beingdonebyDr.R.R.Khetreandthe
articleshandedovertohim. HealsodeposesaboutthelettergivenbyPSI
VanjaritoHeadoftheDepartmentofForensicSciencesforexaminationand
sealingthepiecesoffleshandtheearthseizedfromthespot. Thoughthe

om

witnesswassubjectedtocrossexamination,nothingwaselicitedfromthis

witnesssoastoshaketheversionofthiswitness.

23.

PW4RajuDhadewarisalsothepanchwitness.Hestatesthathe

andoneHadaoTodsamwerecalledbythepoliceaspanch.Hefurtherstates
thattheaccusedwasarrestedintheirpresenceandthearrestpanchnama
(Exh.23)preparedbythepolice,bearshissignature. Hefurtherstatesthat
theseizurepanchnama(Exh.24)alsobearshissignature. PW4alsostates
thaton12thFebruary,2013at06:00p.m.,heandoneNareshwerecalledas
panchandHeadConstableRameshhadbroughtthesampleofblood,hair

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

19conf01.15

rt

andnailoftheaccused.Aseizurepanchnama(Exh.26)bearshissignature.

C
ou

Thiswitnesswassubjectedtocrossexamination. Incrossexamination,he
statesthathedoesnotalwaysgotopolicestationaswitness. Hefurther
states that it is false that the articles were brought in the police station.
Though it was suggested that the panchnama was not prepared in his

24.

ig
h

presenceandhedeposedfalsely,heflatlydeniedthesame.

PW8 Ramesh Yedme is the Head Constable who took the

accusedformedicalexaminationandreceivedtheinjurycertificatefromthe

MedicalOfficer.Hewasalsohandedoverthebloodsample,pubichair,nail
andstainedbloodbythedoctor.Thiswitnessalsodeposesthatthesearticles

ba
y

weresealed.Nothingdamagingwasbroughtinthecrossexamination.

25.

PW11 Prakash Kshirsagar is the Head Constable and is the

carrierofmuddemalpropertytoChemicalAnalyseralongwiththeletters

om

issuedbyPSIVanjari.

26.

PW12 Ramesh Mendhe was working as Circle Officer at the

relevanttime. HedeposesthatonthedirectionsofNaibTahsildar,hehad
preparedthemapofthespotbyvisitingthespotinpresenceoftwopanchas.
ThesaidpanchnamaisatExh.74.Perusalofthesaiddocumentrevealsthat
thespotisthepartiallyconstructedbuildingoftheAnganwadiandtheactual
spotisoneofthecornersofthispartiallyconstructedbuilding.

27.

Thus, on considering the evidence brought on record by the

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

20conf01.15

rt

prosecution, we have no hesitation to say that the prosecution has

C
ou

established and proved that the child victim Srushti was subjected to a
forceful sexual violence. The death of the victim is homicidal. On
consideringallthecircumstances,suchasthevictimwaslastlyseeninthe
company of the accused, within a short span the victim found dead
subjected to sexual violation, the accused who was lying near the victim,

ig
h

MedicoLegalCertificateprovedbyPW7,weareoftheconsideredviewthat
theaccusedandtheaccusedaloneistheauthorofthecrimeofrapeand

28.

murderofchildvictimSrushti.

Insofar as the aspect of confirmation of the death sentence is

ba
y

concerned,itisthesubmissionofSmt.BhartiDangre,thelearnedPPthatthe
accusedwhoisthematernaluncleofthevictim,tookawaythechildvictim
fromthecustodyofhergrandfatheronapretextandthenthevictimwas
subjectedtoaviolentsexualassault.ThelearnedPPfurthersubmitsthatthe

om

actoftheaccusedisnotonlycruelbutshowingtheutmostperversityofthe
psycheoftheaccusedsatisfyinghislustandoverpoweringthehelplesschild

victimandsuchheinousactoftheaccusedhasshockedtheconsciousofthe
societyandforthesaidact,theonlypunishmentisthedeathpunishment.
ThelearnedPPplacesheavyrelianceonthejudgmentsoftheApexCourtas
wellasthisCourtinthecasesofBachanSingh.v.StateofPunjab(reported
inAIR1980SC,898);MachhiSinghandothers.v.StateofPunjab(reported
inAIR1983SC957);LaxmanNaik.v.StateofOrissa(reportedin1994(3)
SCC, 381); Dhananjoy Chatterjee alias Dhana .v. State of West Bengal
(reported in 1994 (2) SCC, 220); Molai and another .v. State of Madhya

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

21conf01.15

rt

Pradesh (reported in AIR 200 SC, 177); Kunal Majumdar .v. State of

C
ou

Rajasthan(reportedin2012(9)SCC,320);RajendraPralhadraoWasnik.v.
State of Maharashtra (reported in 2012 (4) SCC, 37); Shankar Kisanrao
Khade.v.StateofMaharashtra(reportedin2013(5)SCC,546);Gurvail
SinghaliasGalaandanother.v.StateofPunjab(reportedin2013(2)SCC,
713);BhaikonaliasBakulBorah.v.StateofAssam(reportedin2013(9)

ig
h

SCC,769);VasantaSampatDupare.v.StateofMaharashtra(reportedin
2015(1)SCC,253);Sangeetandanother.v.StateofHaryana(reportedin
2013(2)SCC,452);Sandeep.v.StateofUttarPradesh(reportedin2012(6)

SCC, 107); State of Maharashtra .v. Rakesh Manohar Kamble @ Niraj

Ramesh Wakekar and another (reported in 2014 All MR (Cri), 2043);

ba
y

Purushottam Dashrath Borate and another .v. State of Maharashtra

(Criminal Appeal No. 1439 of 2013, decided on 08th May, 2015); Swamy
Shraddananda alias Murali Manohar Mishra .v. State of Karnataka

om

(reported in 2008 (13) SCC, 767); and Deepak Rai .v. State of Bihar
(reportedin2013(10)SCC,421).

29.

Per contra, Shri Bansod, the learned Counsel for the

appellant/accusedsubmitsthattheappellant/accusedisayoungboyhaving
a poor family background and the case would not fall in the category of
rarest of rare cases. He submits that there is every possibility that the
appellant/accusedcouldberehabilitatedandwouldnotcommitanyoffence
infuture.Hefurthersubmitsthatatthemost,theappellant/accusedcanbe
directedtoservethemaximumterminjailwithoutremission.ShriBansod
also submits that the witnesses on which the prosecution relies are the

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

22conf01.15

rt

interestedwitnessesbeingthefatherandthegrandfatherofthevictim. In

C
ou

supportofhissubmission, thelearnedCounsel forthe appellant/accused

placesheavyrelianceonthejudgmentsoftheApexCourtinthecasesof
RameshbhaiChandubhaiRathod.v.StateofGujarat(reportedinAIR2011
SC,903)andNeelKumaraliasAnilKumar.v.StateofHaryana(reportedin

30.

ig
h

2012(5)SCC,766).

Beforewedealwiththeaspectreferredtoabove,itwillnotbeout

ofplacetostatethatthisCourtrecentlywasposedwiththesimilarquestion

inthematterof StateofMaharashtra.v.RakeshManoharKamble@Niraj
RameshWakekarandanother(citedsupra)towhich,oneofus(JusticeB.R.

ba
y

Gavai)isaparty.

31.

Asthevictiminthecaseisachild,itwillnotbeoutofplaceto

om

quotethewordsofKahlilGibraninhisfamousworkTheProphetas

Yourchildrenarenotyourchildren.
TheyarethesonsanddaughtersofLife'slongingforitself.
Theycomethroughyoubutnotfromyou,
Andthoughtheyarewithyouyettheybelongnottoyou.
Youmaygivethemyourlovebutnotyourthoughts,
Fortheyhavetheirownthoughts.
Youmayhousetheirbodiesbutnottheirsouls,
Fortheirsoulsdwellinthehousesoftomorrow,whichyoucannot
visit,noteveninyourdreams.

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

rt

23conf01.15

C
ou

Hereisthecasewhereinthevictim,aminorchild of2andyears, was

subjectedtoaviolentsexualactinmostgruesomeandleasttosayinbeastly
manner.

32.

As stated above, this Court in somewhat the similar

ig
h

circumstance,whileconsideringtheconfirmationofdeathpenalty,indepth
and detailed, considered the various aspects in the matter of State of
Maharashtra .v. Rakesh Manohar Kamble @ Niraj Ramesh Wakekar and

another (cited supra). It will not be out of place to refer the relevant
observationsofthisCourtinthematterof StateofMaharashtra.v.Rakesh

ba
y

ManoharKamble@NirajRameshWakekarandanother(citedsupra).Inthe
saidmatter,theaccusedRakeshandaccusedAmaraskedfordrinkingwater
toPW1Prabhaandshegavewaterthroughwindowofthehouse.Accused
RakeshaskedPW1Prabhatoopenthedoor. Asshepaidnoheedtohis

om

demand,bygivingblowsonthedoor,hemadePW1Prabhatoopenthe
door. Accused Rakesh wasbehind the daughter ofPW1 Prabha, namely

Kanchan.PW1Prabhasensingdanger,gavesignaltodaughterKanchanto
runaway.ThereafterKanchanranaway.AccusedRakeshandAmarchased
her.ThoughKanchanmadeanattempttotakeshelterofoneBhimrao,they
ledassaultonBhimraoandtookawayKanchantowardsthelandownedby
oneMankar. WhenthewitnessPW1Prabhaandotherwitnessesrushed
towardsthesaidland,theyfoundthatKanchanwaslyingintheland. She
wasdeadandhavinginjuriesonhercheek,headandbreast.Inthecaseof
RakeshKamble,thisCourtfoundthatthedeceasedwaslastseenwiththe

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

24conf01.15

rt

accusedpersonsinlatenightandthedeadbodywasdiscoveredinthenext

C
ou

morning. ThisCourt,onappreciatingtheevidenceofthosewitnesseswho
heard the screams of the deceased for help, immediate disclosure of the
namesoftheaccusedbythemothertothepolicepatilandfindingthebody
in the morning, held that the last seen theory was established by the
prosecution.Inthepresentmatter,thetimegapbetweenthedeceasedlast

ig
h

seenwiththeaccusedandfindingthedeadbodyofthedeceasedvictimwho
wassubjected tosexualexploitation and the accused lyingnear the dead

bodyisverynarrowandproximate.

33.

Inthepresentcase,theevidenceofthegrandfathershowsthat

ba
y

thevictimwascarriedbytheaccusedat07:30p.m.andwithinashortspanof
lesserthananhour,thegrandfatherandthefatherfoundthedeadbodyof
thevictim. Thematerialonrecordshowsthatontheverydayi.e.on11 th
February,2013,PW1Marotihadlodgedthereportinthepolicestationat

om

about21:25hours.ThisCourt,inthematterofRakeshKamble,byreferring

tovariousjudgmentsoftheApexCourt,observedthus

71.

What ismost important inthe present case is

the time gap betweenthe period whenthe accused were

lastseentogetherwiththedeceasedandfindingofthedead
bodyofthedeceased.Fromtheevidenceoftheprosecution
witnesses,itcansafelybeconcludedthatthedeceasedwas
last seen together with the accused between 3.00 to 3.30
a.m.inthemidnightof17to18December,2005.Thedead
bodywasdiscoveredimmediatelythereafterinthemorning
after P.W.4 Sanjay Mankar had noticed blood stained

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

25conf01.15

rt

clothesofthedeceasedinhisfarm.Itwillbeappropriateto
refertotheobservationsmadebytheHon'bleApexCourtin
whichareasunder:

C
ou

the case of State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Satish (cite supra)

ba
y

ig
h

"22.
The lastseen theory comes into play
wherethetimegapbetweenthepointoftimewhen
the accused and the deceased were last seen alive
andwhenthedeceasedisfounddeadissosmallthat
possibility of any person other than the accused
beingtheauthorofthecrimebecomesimpossible.It
would be difficult in some cases to positively
establish that the deceased was last seen with the
accusedwhenthereisalonggapandpossibilityof
other persons coming in between exists. In the
absenceofanyotherpositiveevidencetoconclude
that the accused and the deceased were last seen
together, it would be hazardous to come to a
conclusionofguiltinthosecases.Inthiscasethereis
positiveevidencethatthedeceasedandtheaccused
were seen together by witnesses Pws 3 and 5, in
additiontotheevidenceofP.W.2.
(emphasissupplied)

Shri Bansod, the learned Counsel for the appellant/accused

om

34.

submits that the witnesses brought by the prosecution are the interested

witnessesbeingthefatherandgrandfatherofthevictim. ThisCourtalso
considered that aspect in the matter of Rakesh Kamble wherein a similar
standwastakenbythedefence.ThisCourtobservedthus

47.

Theanotherlimbofattackontheevidenceofthese

witnessesisthattheyaretheinterestedwitnessesandassuch
reliancecouldnotbeplacedontheevidenceofthesewitnesses.
Itwillberelevanttorefertoparagraphno.39oftheJudgmentof
theApexCourtinthecaseofSubalGhoraiandothersvs.Stateof

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

26conf01.15

C
ou

[2014ALLSCR184],whichreadsasunder:

rt

West Bengal, reported in (2013) 4 Supreme Court Cases, 607 :

ba
y

ig
h

"39. It is true that the prosecution has relied on the

evidenceofinterestedwitnessesbut,interestedwitness
isnotnecessarilyabadwitness.Infact,ifthewitnessis
related to the deceased, there is less chance of his
leaving aside the real assailants. The evidence of
interested witness has to be analysed with care. But,
oncethecourtcomestotheconclusionthatitistruthful
and in accord with the relevant circumstances on
record, the court should not hesitate to accept it and
recordconvictiononthebasisthereof.Inthiscase,all
the eyewitnesses are consistent about the prosecution
caseasregardsassaultonthedeceasedandsettingon
fire of the houses of Dharas. We are, therefore, not
inclinedtorejecttheirevidenceonthegroundthatthey
arerelatedtothedeceased.Asalreadynoted,twoofthe
eyewitnessesi.e.P.W.12JaminiandP.W.13Mandakini
are injured witnesses, whose presence at the scene of
offence cannot be doubted. They completely bear out
theprosecutioncase."
(emphasissupplied)

om

48.

35.

Itcan, thus, be clearly seenthattheattackonthe

groundthatthesewitnessesareinterestedwitnesseswouldalso
benotsustainable.

In the present matter also, as we find that the version of the

witnesses namely the father and grandfather i.e. Maroti and Pundlik
respectively is truthful and reliable version, we are unable to accept the
submissionofthelearnedCounselfortheappellant/accused.Itisalsonotin
disputethatthepresentcaseisbasedonthecircumstantialevidence. The
lawiswellsettledonthisaspect.Itwillnotbeoutofplacetorefertheoftenly
quotedthejudgmentoftheApexCourtonthecircumstantialevidencei.e.in

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

27conf01.15

rt

thecaseofSharadBirdichandSarda.v.StateofMaharashtra(reportedin

C
ou

2009ALLSCR(O.C.C.),281).ThesameisalsoreferredbythisCourtinthe
matterofRakeshKambleandtheobservationsreadthus

37.

Undoubtedly, the present case is based on the

circumstantialevidence.Thelawontheaspectofconvictionin
the case of circumstantial evidence has now been very well

ig
h

crystalized.Itwillberelevanttoreferparagraphs152,153and
154oftheJudgmentoftheApexCourtinthecaseof Sharad
Birdhichand Sarda vs. StateofMaharashtra, 116:[2009ALL

SCR(O.C.C.)281]whichreadasunder:

om

ba
y

"152.BeforediscussingthecasesrelieduponbytheHigh
Court, we would like to cite a few decisions on the
nature, character and essential proof required in a
criminal case which rests on circumstantial evidence
alone.Themostfundamentalandbasicdecisionofthis
Court is Hanumant V. State of Madhya Pradesh. This
case has been uniformly followed and applied by this
Courtinalargenumberoflaterdecisionsuptodate,for
instance, the cases of Tufail (Alias) Simmi .v. State of
UttarPradesh and Ramgopalv.StateofMaharashtra.It
maybeusefultoextractwhatMahajan,Jhaslaiddown
inHanumantcase:
Itiswelltorememberthatincaseswheretheevidenceis
of a circumstantial nature, the circumstances from
whichtheconclusionofguiltistobedrawnshouldinthe
first instance be fully established, and all the facts so
established should be consistent only with the
hypothesis of the guilt of the accused. Again, the
circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and
tendencyandtheyshouldbesuchastoexcludeevery
hypothesisbuttheoneproposedtoberoved.Inother
words,theremustbeachainofevidencesofarcomplete
asnottoleaveanyreasonablegroundforaconclusion
consistentwiththeinnocenceoftheaccusedanditmust
besuchastoshowthatwithinallhumanprobabilitythe
actmusthavebeendonebytheaccused.

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

28conf01.15

rt

153.Acloseanalysisofthisdecisionwouldshowthatthe
following conditions must be fulfilled before a case
againstanaccusedcanbesaidtobefullyestablished:

C
ou

(1)thecircumstancesfromwhichtheconclusionofguilt
istobedrawnshouldbefullyestablished.

ig
h

ItmaybenotedherethatthisCourtindicatedthatthe
circumstancesconcerned'mustorshould'andnot'may
be'established. Thereisnotonly agrammaticalbuta
legaldistinctionbetween'maybeproved'and'mustbe
orshouldbeproved'aswasheldbythisCourtinShivaji
Sahabrao Bobade vs. State of Maharashtra where the
following observations were made:(SCC para 19, p.
807:SCC(Cri)p.1047).

Certainly,itisaprimaryprinciplethattheaccusedmust
be and not merely may be guilty before a court can
convictandthementaldistancebetween'maybe'and
'must be' is long and divides vague conjectures from
sureconclusions.

ba
y

(2)
thefactssoestablishedshouldbeconsistentonly
withthehypothesisoftheguiltoftheaccused,thatisto
say, they should not be explainable on any other
hypothesisexceptthattheaccusedisguilty,
(3)
the circumstances should be of a conclusive
natureandtendency,

om

(4)
they should exclude every possible hypothesis
excepttheonetobeproved,and

36.

(5)
theremustbeachainofevidencesocompleteas
nottoleaveanyreasonable groundfortheconclusion
consistentwiththeinnocenceoftheaccusedandmust
show that in all human probability the act must have
beendonebytheaccused.
154. These five golden principles, if we may say so,
constitutethepanchsheeloftheproofofacasebasedon
circumstantialevidence."

We have already referred to the circumstances on which the

prosecutionrelies,weneednotrepeatthesame. Sufficetosaythatthese
circumstancesareprovedbytheprosecution.Thecrucialquestionforour
consideration is now whether the death penalty awarded to the
appellant/accusedneedstobeconfirmedornot. Thisaspectisalsonow

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

29conf01.15

rt

crystallized by the judgments of the Apex Court in the cases of Bachan

C
ou

Singh.v.StateofPunjabandMachhiSinghandothers.v.StateofPunjab
(citedsupra)as

75.

TheConstitutionBenchoftheHon'bleApexCourt

inthecaseof BachanSinghvs.StateofPunjab(supra) while

upholding the constitutionality of Section 302 of the Indian

ig
h

PenalCode,insofarasitprovidesdeathsentenceand section
354(3)ofCr.P.C.hasobservedthus:

om

ba
y

195. In Jagmohan, this Court had held that this

sentencing discretion is to be exercised judicially on
wellrecognised principles, after balancing all the
aggravatingandmitigatingcircumstancesofthecrime.
By "wellrecognised principles" the Court obviously
meant the principles crystallised by judicial decisions
illustrating astowhatwereregardedasaggravating or
mitigatingcircumstancesinthosecases.Thelegislative
changessinceJagmohanaswehavediscussedalready
donothavetheeffectofabrogatingornullifyingthose
principles.Theonlyeffectisthattheapplicationofthose
principles is now to be guided by the paramount
beacons of legislative policy discernible from Sections
354(3)and235(2),namely:(1)Theextremepenaltycan
beinflictedonlyingravestcasesofextremeculpability:
(2)Inmakingchoiceofthesentence,inadditiontothe
circumstancesoftheoffence,dueregardmustbepaidto
thecircumstancesoftheoffenderalso.
196. We will first notice some of the aggravating
circumstanceswhich,intheabsenceofanymitigating
circumstances,havebeenregardedasanindicationfor
impositionoftheextremepenalty.
197.Preplanned,calculated,coldbloodedmurderhas
alwaysbeenregardedasoneofanaggravatedkind.In
Jagmohan,itwasreiteratedbythisCourtthatifamurder
is"diabolicallyconceivedandcruellyexecuted",itwould
justify the imposition of the death penalty on the
murderer. The same principle was substantially
reiterated by V. R. Krishna Iyer, J., speaking for the
Bench,inEdigaAnamma,intheseterms:

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

30conf01.15

C
ou

rt

"The weapons used and the manner of their use, the

horrendousfeaturesofthecrimeandhapless,helpless
stateofthevictim,andthelike,steeltheheartofthelaw
forasternersentence."

om

ba
y

ig
h

198.Itmaybenotedthatthisindicatorforimposingthe
deathsentencewascrystallisedinthatcaseafterpaying
dueregardtotheshiftinlegislativepolicyembodiedin
Section354(3)oftheCodeofCriminalProcedure,1973,
althoughonthedateofthatdecision(February11,1974),
thisprovisionhadnotcomeintoforce.InParasRam's
case,also,towhichareferencehasbeenmadeearlier,it
wasemphaticallystatedthatapersonwhoinafitofanti
social piety commits "bloodcurdling butchery" of his
child, fully deserves to be punished with death. In
Rajendra Prasad, however, the majority (of 2 : 1) has
completely reversed the view that had been taken in
EdigaAnammaregardingtheapplicationofSection354
(3)onthispoint.Accordingtoit,aftertheenactmentof
Section354(3),'murdermostfoul'isnotthetest.The
shockingnatureofthecrimeorthenumberofmurders
committedisalsonotthecriterion.Itwassaidthatthe
focushasnowcompletelyshiftedfromthecrimetothe
criminal."Specialreasons"necessaryforimposingdeath
penalty"mustrelatenottothecrimeassuchbuttothe
criminal".
199. With great respect, we find ourselves unable to
agree to this enunciation. As we read Sections 354 (3)
and235(2)andotherrelatedprovisions oftheCodeof
1973,itisquitecleartousthatformakingthechoiceof
punishmentorforascertainingtheexistenceorabsence
of"specialreasons"inthatcontext,theCourtmustpay
dueregardbothtothecrimeandthecriminal.Whatis
the relative weight to be given to the aggravating and
mitigating factors, depends on the facts and
circumstances of the particular case. More often than
not, these two aspects are so intertwined that it is
difficult to give a separate treatment to each of them.
Thisissobecause'styleistheman'.Inmanycases,the
extremelycruelorbeastlymannerofthecommissionof
murder is itself a demonstrated index of the depraved
character of the perpetrator. That is why, it is not
desirabletoconsiderthecircumstancesofthecrimeand
thecircumstancesofthecriminalintwoseparatewater
tightcompartments.Inasense,tokillistobecrueland
therefore all murders are cruel. But such cruelty may
varyinitsdegreeofculpability.Anditisonlywhenthe
culpabilityassumestheproportionofextremedepravity
that"specialreasons"canlegitimatelybesaidtoexist.

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

31conf01.15

C
ou

rt

200.DrawinguponthepenalstatutesoftheStatesinU.
S. A. framed after Furman v. Georgia, in general, and
clauses2(a),(b),(c),and(d)oftheIndianpenalCode
(Amendment)Billpassedin1978bytheRajyaSabha,in
particular,Dr.Chitalehassuggestedthese"aggravating
circumstances":
"Aggravatingcircumstances:ACourtmay,however,in
the following cases impose the penalty of death in its
discretion:
(a) if the murder has been committed after previous
planningandinvolvesextremebrutality;or

ig
h

(b)ifthemurderinvolvesexceptionaldepravity;or
(c) if the murder is of a member of any of the armed
forcesoftheUnionorofamemberofanypoliceforceor
ofanypublicservantandwascommitted
(i)whilesuchmemberorpublicservantwasonduty;or

om

ba
y

(ii)inconsequenceofanythingdoneorattemptedtobe
done by such member or public servant in the lawful
dischargeofhisdutyassuchmemberorpublicservant
whetheratthetimeofmurderhewassuchmemberor
publicservant,asthecasemaybe,orhadceasedtobe
suchmemberorpublicservant;or
(d)if the murder is of a person whohad acted in the
lawfuldischargeofhisdutyunderSection43oftheCode
of Criminal Procedure, 1973, or who had rendered
assistancetoaMagistrateorapoliceofficerdemanding
hisaidorrequiringhisassistanceunder Section37and
Section129ofthesaidCode."
201. Stated broadly, there can be no objection to the
acceptanceoftheseindicatorsbutaswehaveindicated
already,wewouldprefernottofetterjudicialdiscretion
byattemptingtomakeanexhaustiveenumerationone
wayortheother.
202. In Rajendra Prasad, the majority said : "It is
constitutionally permissible to swing a criminal out of
corporeal existence only if the security of State and
society, public order and the interests of the general
publiccompelthatcourseasprovidedinArticle19(2)to
(6)."Ourobjectionisonlytotheword"only".Whileit
maybeconcededthatamurderwhichdirectlythreatens,
orhasanextremepotentialitytoharmorendangerthe
security of State and society, public order and the
interests of the general public, may provide "special
reasons"tojustifytheimpositionoftheextremepenalty
onthepersonconvictedofsuchaheinousmurder,itis
notpossibletoagreethatimpositionofdeathpenaltyon

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

32conf01.15

C
ou

rt

murdererswhodonotfallwithinthisnarrowcategoryis
constitutionally impermissible. We have discussed and
heldabovethattheimpugnedprovisionsinSection302,
PenalCode,beingreasonableandinthegeneralpublic
interest,donotoffend Article19,orits'ethos'; nordo
they in any manner violate Articles 21 and 14. All the
reasonsgivenbyusforupholdingthevalidityofSec.302,
Penal Code, fully apply to the case of Section 354 (3),
Code of Criminal Procedure, also. The same criticism
appliestotheviewtakeninBishnuDeoShawv.Stateof
WestBengal,(1979)3SCC714,whichfollowsthedictum
inRajendraPrasad(ibid).

om

ba
y

ig
h

203. In several countries which have retained death

penalty,preplannedmurderformonetarygain,orbyan
assassinhiredformonetaryrewardis,also,considereda
capitaloffenceofthefirstdegreewhich,intheabsence
of any ameliorating circumstances, is punishable with
death. Such rigid categorisation would dangerously
overlap the domain of legislative policy. It may
necessitate,asitwere,aredefinitionof'murder'orits
further classification. Then,insomedecisions, murder
byfirearm,oranautomaticprojectileorbomb,orlike
weapon,theuseofwhichcreatesahighsimultaneous
riskofdeathorinjurytomorethanoneperson,hasalso
been treated as an aggravated type of offence. No
exhaustiveenumerationofaggravatingcircumstancesis
possible. But this much can be said that in order to
qualify for inclusion in the category of "aggravating
circumstances" which may form the basis of 'special
reasons'in Section354(3),circumstancefoundonthe
factsofaparticularcase,mustevidenceaggravationof
anabnormalorspecialdegree.
204.Dr.Chitaleyhassuggestedthesemitigatingfactors
"Mitigating circumstances : In the exercise of its
discretionintheabovecases,theCourtshalltakeinto
accountthefollowingcircumstances:
(1)Thattheoffencewascommittedundertheinfluence
ofextremementaloremotionaldisturbance.
(2)Theageoftheaccused.Ittheaccusedisyoungorold,
heshallnotbesentencedtodeath.
(3)Theprobabilitythattheaccusedwouldnotcommit
criminal acts of violence as would constitute a
continuingthreattosociety.
(4)Theprobabilitythattheaccusedcanbereformedand
rehabilitated.TheStateshallbyevidenceprovethatthe
accuseddoesnotsatisfytheconditions3and4above.

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

33conf01.15

rt

(5)Thatinthefactsandcircumstancesofthecasethe
accused believed that he was morally justified in
committingtheoffence.

C
ou

(6) That the accused acted under the duress or

dominationofanotherperson.
(7)Thattheconditionoftheaccusedshowedthathewas
mentallydefectiveandthatthesaiddefectimpairedhis
capacitytoappreciatethecriminalityofhisconduct."

ig
h

205. We will do no more than to say that these are

undoubtedlyrelevantcircumstancesandmustbegiven
greatweightinthedeterminationofsentence.Someof
these factors like extreme youth can instead be of
compellingimportance.InseveralStatesofIndia,there
are in force special enactments, according to which a
'child'thatis,'apersonwhoatthedateofmurderwas
lessthan16yearsofage',cannotbetried,convictedand
sentencedtodeathorimprisonmentforlifeformurder,
nordealtwithaccordingtothesamecriminalprocedure
asanadult.ThespecialActsprovideforareformatory
procedureforsuchjuvenileoffendersorchildren.

om

ba
y

206. According to some Indian decisions, the

postmurder remorse, penitence or repentence by the
murdererisnotafactorwhichmayinducetheCourtto
passthelesserpenalty(e.g.MominuddinSardar).AIR
1935Cal591.Butthosedecisionscannolongerbeheld
tobegoodlawinviewofthecurrentpenologicaltrends
and the sentencing policy outlined in Sections 235 (2)
and 354 (3). We have already extracted the views of
MessingerandBittner(ibid),whichareinpoint.
207.Therearenumerousothercircumstancesjustifying
the passing of the lighter sentence; as there are
countervailing circumstances of aggravation. "We
cannotobviouslyfeedintoajudicialcomputerallsuch
situations since they are astrological imponderables in
an imperfect and undulating society." Nonetheless, it
cannotbeoveremphasisedthatthescopeandconcept
ofmitigatingfactorsintheareaofdeathpenaltymust
receive a liberal and expansive construction by the
courtsinaccordwiththesentencingpolicywritlargein
Section 354 (3). Judges should never be bloodthirsty.
Hangingofmurderershasneverbeentoogoodforthem.
Facts and figures albeit incomplete, furnished by the
Union of India, show that in the past, Courts have
inflictedtheextremepenaltywithextremeinfrequency
afactwhichatteststothecautionandcompassionwhich
theyhavealwaysbroughttobearontheexerciseoftheir
sentencing discretion in so grave a matter. It is,

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

34conf01.15

77.

ig
h

C
ou

rt

therefore, imperative to voice the concern that courts,

aidedbythebroadillustrativeguidelinesindicatedbyus,
will discharge the onerous function with evermore
scrupulouscareandhumaneconcern,directedalongthe
highroadoflegislativepolicyoutlinedinSec.354(3),viz.,
thatforpersonsconvictedofmurder,lifeimprisonment
istheruleanddeathsentenceanexception.Arealand
abidingconcernforthedignityofhumanlifepostulates
resistancetotakingalifethroughlaw'sinstrumentality.
Thatoughtnottobedonesaveintherarestofrarecases
when the alternative option is unquestionably
foreclosed.
The ApexCourtinthe case of MachhiSingh and

othersvs.StateofPunjab(supra)hasobservedthus;

om

ba
y

32.Thereasonswhythecommunityasawholedoesnot
endorse the humanistic approach reflected in "death
sentenceinnocase"doctrinearenotfartoseek.Inthe
firstplace,theveryhumanisticedificeisconstructedon
thefoundationof"reverenceforlife"principle.Whena
memberofthecommunityviolatesthisveryprincipleby
killing anothermember, thesocietymay notfeelitself
boundbytheshacklesofthisdoctrine.Secondly,ithasto
berealisedthateverymemberofthecommunityisable
to live with safety without his or her own life being
endangered because of the protective arm of the
communityandonaccountoftheruleoflawenforced
byit.Theveryexistenceoftheruleoflawandthefearof
beingbroughttobookoperatesasadeterrenttothose
who have no scruples in killing others if it suits their
ends.Everymemberofthecommunityowesadebtto
thecommunityforthisprotection.Wheningratitudeis
showninsteadofgratitudeby'killing'amemberofthe
community which protects the murderer himself from
beingkilled,orwhenthecommunityfeelsthatforthe
sakeofselfpreservationthekillerhastobekilled,the
community may well withdraw the protection by
sanctioningthedeathpenalty.Butthecommunitywill
notdosoineverycase.Itmaydoso(inrarestofrare
cases)whenitscollectiveconscienceissoshockedthatit
will expect the holders of the judicial power centre to
inflict death penalty irrespective of their personal
opinionasregardsdesirabilityorotherwiseofretaining
death penalty. The community may entertain such a
sentimentwhenthecrimeisviewedfromtheplatformof
the motive for, or the manner of commission of the

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

35conf01.15

C
ou

IMannerofCommissionofMurder

rt

crime, or the antisocial or abhorrent nature of the

crime,suchasforinstance:

Whenthemurderiscommittedinanextremelybrutal,
grotesque,diabolical,revolting,ordastardlymannerso
as to arouse intense and extreme indignation of the
community.Forinstance.
(i)Whenthehouseofthevictimissetaflamewiththe
endinviewtoroasthimaliveinthehouse,

ig
h

(ii) When the victim is subjected to inhuman acts of

tortureorcrueltyinordertobringabouthisorherdeath.
(iii)Whenthebodyofthevictimiscutintopiecesorhis
bodyisdismemberedinafiendishmanner.
IIMotiveforcommissionofmurder.

ba
y

When the murder is committed for a motive which

evincestotaldepravityandmeanness.forinstancewhen
(a) a hired assassin commits murder for the sake of
money or reward; (b) a coldblooded murder is
committed witha deliberate design inorder toinherit
propertyortogaincontroloverpropertyofawardora
person under the control of the murderer or visavis
whomthemurdererisinadominatingpositionorina
positionoftrust;(c)amurderiscommittedinthecourse
forbetrayalofthemotherland.

om

IIIAntisocialorsociallyabhorrentnatureofthecrime.
(a)WhenmurderofamemberofaScheduledCasteor
minoritycommunityetc.,iscommittednotforpersonal
reasonsbutincircumstanceswhicharousesocialwrath.
Forinstancewhensuchacrimeiscommittedinorderto
terrorize such persons and frighten them into fleeing
from a place or in order to deprive them of, or make
them surrender, lands or benefits conferred on them
with a view to reverse past injustices and in order to
restorethesocialbalance.
(b)Incasesof'bride burning' and whatareknownas
'dowrydeaths'orwhenmurderiscommittedinorderto
remarryforthesakeofextractingdowryonceagainorto
marryanotherwomanonaccountofinfatuation.
IVMagnitudeofcrime.
Whenthecrimeisenormousinproportion.Forinstance
when multiple murders say of all or almost all the
membersofafamilyoralargenumberofpersonsofa
particularcaste,community,orlocality,arecommitted.

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

VPersonalityofvictimofmurder.

rt

36conf01.15

C
ou

Whenthevictimofmurderis(a)aninnocentchildwho
could not have or has not provided even an excuse,
much less a provocation, for murder. (b) a helpless
woman or a person rendered helpless by old age or
infirmity.(c)whenthevictimisapersonvisaviswhom
themurdererisinapositionofdominationortrust,(d)
whenthe victim is a public figure generally loved and
respectedbythecommunityfortheservicesrenderedby
himandthemurderiscommittedforpoliticalorsimilar
reasonsotherthanpersonalreasons.

ig
h

33. In this background the guidelines indicated in

BachanSingh'scase(supra)willhavetobeculledoutand
applied to the facts of each individual case where the
question of imposing of death sentence arises. The
following propositions emerge from Bachan Singh's
case:

(i)The extreme penalty of death need not he inflicted

exceptingravestcasesofextremeculpability;

om

ba
y

(ii)Beforeoptingforthedeathpenaltythecircumstances
of the 'offender' also require to be taken into
consideration along with the circumstances of the
'crime';
(iii)Lifeimprisonmentistheruleanddeathsentenceis
an exception. In other words death sentence must be
imposedonlywhenlifeimprisonmentappearstobean
altogetherinadequatepunishmenthavingregardtothe
relevantcircumstancesofthecrime,andprovidedand
only provided, the option to impose sentence of
imprisonment for life cannot be conscientiously
exercisedhavingregardtothenatureandcircumstances
ofthecrimeandalltherelevantcircumstances;
(iv) A balancesheet of aggravating and mitigating
circumstanceshastobedrawnupandindoingsothe
mitigating circumstances have to be accorded full
weightageandajustbalancehastobestruckbetween
theaggravatingandthemitigatingcircumstancesbefore
theoptionisexercised.
34. In order to apply these guidelines inter alia the
followingquestionsmaybeaskedandanswered:
(a) Is there something uncommon about the crime
which renders sentence of imprisonment for life
inadequateandcallsforadeathsentence?
(b)Arethecircumstancesofthecrimesuchthatthereis
noalternativebuttoimposedeathsentenceevenafter
according maximum weightage to the mitigating

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

37conf01.15

C
ou

rt

circumstanceswhichspeakinfavouroftheoffender?

ThisCourt,inthejudgmentofRakeshKamblebyreferringthejudgmentsof
theApexCourt,observedthus

76.

Itcan,thus,beseentheConstitutionBenchofthe

ApexCourtclearlyheldthatinfindingoutpresenceorabsence

ig
h

ofspecialreasonsthecourtmustpaydueregardbothtothe
crimeandthecriminal.Ithasbeenheldthatwhatistherelative
weight to be given to the aggravating and mitigating factors,

depends upon the facts and circumstances of the particular

case.Ithasfurtherbeenheldthatinmanycasestheextremely
cruelorbeastlymannerofthecommissionofmurderisitselfa
demonstrated index of the depraved character of the

ba
y

perpetrator. It has been held that only when the culpability

assumes the proportion of extreme depravity that special

om

reasonscanlegitimatelybesaidtoexist.
78.

It has, thus, been held that when community's

collective conscience is so shocked, that it will expect the

holders of the judicial power centre to inflict death penalty
irrespectiveoftheirpersonalopinionasregardsdesirabilityor
otherwise of retaining death penalty. The Apex Court has
further held that the factors that are to be taken into
consideration while considering as to whether the death
sentenceistobeinflictedornot,arethemannerofcommission
of murder, motive for commission of murder, antisocial or
sociallyabhorrentnatureofthecrimeandmagnitudeofcrime
andpersonalityofvictimofmurder.Ithasbeenfurtherheld
that life imprisonment is the rule and death sentence is an
exception. It has been further held that the balance sheet of

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

38conf01.15

rt

aggravatingandmitigatingcircumstanceshastobedrawn,full
weightageistobegiventomitigatingcircumstancesandajust

C
ou

balance has to be struck between the aggravating and the

mitigatingcircumstancesbeforetheoptionisexercised.Ithas
beenfurtherheldthatwhiletakingdecisionquestionmaybe
asked and answered as to whether there is something
uncommon about the crime which renders sentence of
imprisonmentforlifeinadequateandcallsforadeathsentence.

ig
h

Another question that is required to be answered is, are the

circumstancesofthecrimesuchthatthereisnoalternativebut
to impose death sentence even after according maximum
weightage to the mitigating circumstances which speak in

favouroftheoffender.

ByapplyingyardsticksetbytheApexCourtinthecaseofBachan

ba
y

37.

Singh.v.StateofPunjabandMachhiSinghandothers.v.StateofPunjab
(cited supra) and the observations of this Court in the matter of Rakesh
Kambleifthepresentmatterisconsidered,inouropinion,intheguidelines

om

ofaggravatingcircumstances,thereisamentionofclause(b)whichdeals
withthemurderwhichinvolvesexceptionaldepravity. Inthelightofthis

clause,ifthepresentmatterisseen,therecordrevealsthatthevictimisa
childoftwoandhalfyearsofage. Thevictimwassubjectedtoaforceful
sexualexploitation. Themedicalevidenceshowsthatthedeathiscaused
duetotheforcefulintercourse.Inouropinion,thepresentcasealsocovers
clause (a) of aggravating circumstances wherein it is referred that if a
murderiscommittedafterpreviousplanningandinvolvesextremebrutality.
Inthepresentmatter,achildwastakenfromthecustodyofthegrandfather
andinspiteofhisresistance,achildwassubjectedtosexualviolenceand

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

39conf01.15

rt

thenwasdonetodeath. Inouropinion,theactoftheappellant/accused

C
ou

fallsinclauses(a)and(b)oftheaggravatingcircumstances.Wewouldalso
take into consideration the mitigating circumstances referred to in the
judgmentoftheApexCourtinthecaseofBachanSingh.v.StateofPunjab
(citedsupra).Inouropinion,theonlymitigatingcircumstanceonwhichthe
appellant/accusedseeksbenefitisclause(2)i.e.theaccusedisayoungboy.

ig
h

Even though the said mitigating circumstance of being at young age is

available to the appellant/accused while balancing the aggravating and
mitigating factors, we are of the opinion that the said mitigating

circumstancewouldnotbeofanyhelptotheappellant/accused.

Inouropinion,astheApexCourtobservedinMachhiSinghand

ba
y

38.

others.v.StateofPunjab(citedsupra),theactoftheappellant/accusedisof
such a nature whereinthe collective conscience isso shocked that it will
expecttheholdersofthejudicialpowercentretoinflictdeathpenalty.The

om

Apex Court further observed that the community may entertain such a
sentimentwhenthecrimeisviewedfromtheplatformofthemotivefor,or

the manner of commission of the crime, or the antisocial or abhorrent

nature of the crime. (emphasis supplied). The Apex Court then quoted
certaininstances. Underthecaptionofmannerofcommissionofmurder,
theApexCourtrefersthatwhenthemurderiscommittedinanextremely
brutal,grotesque,diabolical,revolting,ordastardlymannersoastoarouse
intenseandextremeindignationofthecommunity. TheApexCourtthen
alsoreferstothecategoryofpersonalityofvictimofmurder.Whenitrefers
tothevictimofmurderis(a)aninnocentchildwhocouldnothaveorhasnot

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

40conf01.15

rt

provided even an excuse, much less a provocation, for murder. In the

C
ou

presentcase,thereisabsolutelynodoubtinourmindthatthemurderis
committedinextremelybrutalanddastardlymanner.Whileconsideringthe
aspect of the personality of the victim, the record clearly reveals that the
victimisaninnocentchildoftwoandhalfyearswhohardlycouldhaveeither
providedevenanexcuseoraprovocationandwasahelplessvictimofthe

ig
h

lustandtheappellant/accusednotonlyravishedthegirlwithaviolentsexual
attackbutalsoactedinbeastlymanner. Themedicalevidencehasshown
thatthevictimreceivedbitewoundsonthepartsofherbodynamelythe

cheeks,chestandbuttock.Thematerialalsoshowsthatthebodywaslying
onthespothavingthejeanspantremovedfromthepersonofthevictim.

ba
y

The inquest panchnama shows that the victim was subjected to sexual
violenceandthevictimhadreceivedwoundsandbitesoncheeks,chestand
buttock. The version of the witnesses namely Maroti and Punclik, the
scientificevidenceintheformofpostmortemreport,leavesnodoubtthat

om

theaccusedactedinabsolutepervert,inhumanandbeastlymanner.

39.

InthematterofRakeshKamble,whereinthevictimwasagirlof

19yearsofage,thisCourtbyconsideringthecruelandgruesomeactofthe
appellant/accused,posedcertainquestionsandarrivedataconclusionthat
thecasewouldsurelyfallinthecategoryofrarestofrarecases.ThisCourt
observedthus

99.

Wouldthesocietynotexpecttheaccusedwhohave

committed such terror and in extreme brutal, dastardly,

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

41conf01.15

rt

gruesome,cruelmannercommittedrapeofhelplessvictimand
killedherfornofaultofher,tobehanged.Wouldthesociety

C
ou

notexpect,theholdersofthejudicialpowerscentre,toaward
proportionatesentencetotheaccusedwhohavenorespectfor
humanvaluesandhavetreatedayounggirlof19yearsinthe
mostbrutal,cruelanddastardlymanner.WouldtheSocietynot
expectsuchdepravedacttobedealtwithinasternmanner.We
also cannot ignore the recent amendments brought to the

ig
h

IndianPenalCodeonaccountofhugepublichueandcrythat
aroseonaccountofdastardlyactintheheinousandgruesome
rapeandmurderof Nirbhaya.Theamendmentasamatterof
factecho'sthesentimentsoftheSocietyatlarge.Thesentiment

of the Society is glaring explicit, that such heinous crime on

haplesswomenarerequiredtobedealtwithanironhand.We
have,therefore,nohesitationtoholdthat,intheperceptionof

ba
y

theSocietyitwouldsurelybea"rarestofrare"casewhereinthe
deathsentenceisrequiredtobeimposed.

Inthepresentcase,aswehavestatedabove,thevictimwasoftwoandhalf

om

yearsofage,assuch,theheinousandgruesomerapeandmurderofthechild
victim at the hands of the appellant/accused, needs to be dealt with the

deterrentpunishmentlikedeathsentence.Itwillnotbeoutofplacetorefer
tocertainjudgmentsoftheApexCourt. TheApexCourtinthematterof
LaxmanNaik.v.StateofOrissa(citedsupra)hasheldthatthedeathsentence
imposedbythetrialCourtandconfirmedbytheHighCourtwasjustified.
Thefactsofthecasewerethevictimwasachildofsevenyearsofageandthe
accusedwasheruncle. Aftercommittingrapeonthevictim,theaccused
committedmurderofthevictim. TheApexcourtreferredtotheevidence
relatingtotheinjuriesonthedeceasedasunder

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

16.

rt

42conf01.15

Thesearchpartywhichdiscoveredthedeadbodyof

C
ou

the deceased in jungle, noticed that her clothes were soaked

withbloodandthereweremultipleinjuriesonthepersonofthe
deceasedasaredescribedbyDrPushpLataPW11inherpost

mortemreportEx.11aswellasinherstatementmadeinthe
Court.Therewasabrasionontheandfifthlumbarvertebra,as
wellasonleftindexfinger,backofforearm,rightmiddlefinger.

ig
h

There was lacerated wound in the vagina extending towards

rectum and bruises over neck, right and left sternomastoid
muscles.Ondissectingtheunderlinedtissuesoftheneck,the
doctornoticedextravasationofbloodintosubcutaneoustissues

aswellasintheunderlyingsternomastoidmuscles.Thelarynx
andtracheawerecongestedcontainingfrothymucous.Bloody
froths were coming out from the mouth and nostrils. This

ba
y

evidenceeloquentlyspeaksthattheinnocent,helplesssoulwas
firstsubjectedtobrutalandforciblesexualintercourseandthen
mercilesslydonetodeathbythrottlingsothatthereremainsno

om

directevidenceagainsttheculprit.

TheApexCourtthenonthebackdropoftheevidenceofMedicalOfficer,

observedthus

28.

The evidence of Dr Pushp Lata, PW 12, who

conductedthepostmortemoverthedeadbodyofthevictim
goestoshowthatshehadseveralexternalandinternalinjuries
onherpersonincludingaseriousinjuryinherprivateparts
showing the brutality which she was subjected to while
committingrapeonher.ThevictimoftheageofNitmacould
not have even ever resisted the act with which she was
subjectedto. Theappellantseemstohaveactedinabeastly

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

43conf01.15

rt

mannerasaftersatisfyinghislusthethoughtthatthevictim
mightexposehimforthecommissionoftheoffenceofforcible

C
ou

rapeonhertothefamilymembersandothers,theappellant
withaviewtoscreentheevidenceofhiscrimealsoputanend
tothelifeofinnocentgirlwhohadseenonlysevensummers.
The evidence on record is indicative of the fact as to how
diabolically the appellant had conceived of his plan and
brutally executeditandsuchacalculated,coldbloodedand

ig
h

brutalmurderofagirlofaverytenderageaftercommitting
rapeonherwouldundoubtedlyfallinthecategoryofrarestof
therarecasesattractingnopunishmentotherthanthecapital
punishment and consequently we confirm the sentence of

death imposed upon the appellant for the offence under

Section 302 of the Penal Code. As regards the punishment
underSection376,neitherthelearnedtrialJudgenortheHigh

ba
y

Courthaveawardedanyseparateandadditionalsubstantive
sentence and in view of the fact that the sentence of death
awardedtotheappellanthasbeenconfirmedwealsodonot
deem it necessary to impose any sentence on the appellant

om

underSection376.
(emphasissupplied).

40.

TheApexCourtinthematterofRajendraPralhadraoWasnik.v.

StateofMaharashtra(citedsupra),whereinthevictimwasachildofthree
yearsofage,byreferringtovariousjudgmentsincludingthejudgmentofthe
Apexcourtinthecaseof MachhiSinghandothers.v.StateofPunjaband
BachanSingh.v.StateofPunjab(citedsupra),observedthattheCourthasto
strikeabalancebetweenaggravatingandmitigatingcircumstances. Itwill
notbeoutofplacetostatethatinthecaseofRajendraPralhadraoWasnik.v.
State of Maharashtra (cited supra), the victim was subjected to sexual

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

44conf01.15

rt

violenceandtherewerebitemarksonchestleftsidearoundnippleelliptical

C
ou

withdiameters1xxmuscledeep. TheApexCourtinthesaidcase
observedthus

37.

When the Court draws a balance sheet of the

aggravatingandmitigatingcircumstances,forthepurposesof
determiningwhethertheextremesentenceofdeathshouldbe

ig
h

imposedupontheaccusedornot,thescaleofjusticeonlytilts
against the accused as there is nothing but aggravating
circumstancesevidentfrom the recordofthe Court. Infact,
onehastoreallystruggletofindoutiftherewereanymitigating

38.

circumstancesfavouringtheaccused.

Anotheraspectofthematteristhattheminorchild

ba
y

washelplessinthecruelhandsoftheaccused. Theaccused
was holding the child in a relationship of trustbelief and
confidence, in which capacity he took the child from the
houseofPW2.Inotherwords,theaccused,byhisconduct,has
accusedleftthedeceasedinabadlyinjuredconditioninthe
open fields without even clothes. This reflects the most
unfortunateandabusivefacetofhumanconduct,forwhichthe
accusedhastoblamenooneelsethanhisownself.

om

belied the human relationship of trust and worthiness. The

41.

Inthepresentcasealso,theaccusedisthematernaluncleofthe

victim child. The Apex Court recently in the matter of Purushottam

DashrathBorateandanother.v.StateofMaharashtra(citedsupra),wherein
the victim deceased who was serving in a private company and was
subjectedtorapeandmurderatthehandsofthesecurityguardandwas

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

45conf01.15

rt

awarded death sentence on consideration of the submission that the

C
ou

appellant/accused is a person of young age, observed that such

compassionategroundsarepresentinmostofthecasesandarenotrelevant
for interference in awarding death sentence. The Apex Court further
observed that the principle that when the offence is gruesome and was
committedinacalculatedanddiabolicalmanner,theageoftheaccusedmay

15.

ig
h

notbearelevantfactor.

In our opinion, the measure of punishment in a

given case must depend upon the atrocity of the crime; the
conductofthecriminalandthedefencelessandunprotected
stateofthevictim. Impositionofappropriatepunishmentis
themannerinwhichtheCourtsrespondtothesociety'scryfor

ba
y

justice against the criminals. Justice demands that Courts

should impose punishment befitting the crime so that the
Courtsreflectpublicabhorrenceofthecrime.TheCourtsmust

om

notonly keepinviewtherightsofthecriminalbutalsothe
rights of the victim of crime and the society at large while
consideringimpositionofappropriatepunishment.

The Apex Court also made it clear that lack of criminal antecedents also
cannotbeconsideredasmitigatingcircumstances,particularlytakinginto
consideration,thenatureofheinousoffenceandcoldandcalculatedmanner
inwhichitwascommittedbytheaccusedpersons.

42.

TheApexCourtinthematterofVasantaSampatDupare.v.State

ofMaharashtra(citedsupra),whereinthevictimwasagirloffouryearsof

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

46conf01.15

rt

ageandtheappellant/accused,aneighbourluringthevictimforgivingher

C
ou

chocolate,rapedheranddonehertodeathbyhitofstones.TheApexCourt
onthebackdropofthemedicalevidence,namelythevictimwassubjectedto
forcefulsexualintercourse,thedeceasedwaslastseenwiththeaccusedand
theimmediatelodgementofreportbythefatherofthegirl,lendingcredence

60.

ig
h

totheprosecutioncase,observedthus

Inthecaseathand,aswefind,notonlywasthe

rape committed in a brutal manner but murder was also

committed in a barbaric manner. The rape of a minor girl

childisnothingbutamonstrousburialofherdignityinthe
darkness.Itisacrimeagainsttheholybodyofagirlchildand
the soul of society and such a crime is aggravated by the

ba
y

mannerinwhichithasbeencommitted. Thenatureofthe
crimeandthemannerinwhichithasbeencommittedspeaks
about its uncommonness. The crime speaks of depravity,
degradationanduncommonality.Itisdiabolicalandbarbaric.

om

The crime was committed in an inhuman manner.

Indubitably,thesegoalongwaytoestablishtheaggravating
circumstances.
61.

We are absolutely conscious that mitigating

circumstancesaretobetakenintoconsideration.Thelearned
Counsel for the appellant pointing out the mitigating
circumstanceswouldsubmitthattheappellantisinhismid
fiftiesandthereispossibilityofhisreformation. Beitnoted,
theappellantwasagedaboutfortysevenyearsatthetimeof
commissionofthecrime.Asisnoticeable,therehasbeenno
remorseonthepartoftheappellant. Therearecaseswhen
thisCourthascommuted the death sentence tolife finding
thattheaccusedhasexpressedremorseorthecrimewasnot

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

47conf01.15

rt

premeditated.Buttheobtainingfactualmatrixwhenunfolded
stage bystage would showthe premeditation, theproclivity

C
ou

andtherapaciousdesire.ThelearnedCounselwouldsubmit
that the appellant had no criminal antecedents but we find
that he was a historysheeter and had a number of cases
pendingagainsthim. Thatalonemaynotbesufficient. The
appalling cruelty shown by him to the minor girl child is
extremelyshockinganditgetsaccentuated,whenhisageis

ig
h

taken into consideration. It was not committed under any

mental stress or emotional disturbance and it is difficult to
comprehendthathewouldnotcommitsuchactsandwould
be reformed or rehabilitated. As the circumstances would

graphicallydepict,hewouldremainamenacetosociety,fora
defenceless child has become his prey. In our considered

ba
y

opinion,therearenomitigatingcircumstances.

62.

As we perceive, this case deserves to fall in the

categoryoftherarestofrarecases.Itisinconceivablefromthe

om

perspectiveofthesocietythatamarriedmanagedabouttwo
scoresandsevenmakesafouryearsminorinnocentgirlchild
the prey of his lust and deliberately causes her death. A
helpless and defenceless child gets raped and murdered
becauseoftheacquaintanceoftheappellantwiththepeople
ofthesociety.Thisisnotonlybetrayalofanindividualtrust
butdestructionanddevastationofsocialtrust.Itisperversity
initsenormity.Itirrefragablyinvitestheextremeabhorrence
and indignation of the collective. It is an anathema to the
socialbalance.Inourview,itmeetsthetestoftherarestofthe
rarecaseandweunhesitatinglysohold.

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::

48conf01.15
In view of the aforesaid discussion, we uphold the order of

rt

43.

C
ou

convictionandsentenceasrecordedbythelearnedtrialJudgeandconfirm
thedeathsentenceawardedbyhimtotheappellant/accused.

Inviewofthejudgmentandorderpassedinaforesaidreference,
noordersarerequiredtobepassedinCriminalAppealNo.321of2015filed

isdismissed.

ig
h

bytheappellant/accused.Intheresult,theCriminalAppealNo.321of2015

JUDGE
`

om

ba
y

*rrg.

JUDGE

::: Uploaded on - 12/10/2015

::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2015 20:49:08 :::