VERY IMPORTANT POINT
The accused who murdered three members of the family and attempted to murder another with determination to kill all to take revenge in a ghastly cruel manner is a menace to the society. There are no mitigating circumstance in his favour to interfere with the death sentence imposed on him by Courts below.

Headnote:
A. Penal Code of India, Sections 302 and 307- Conviction and sentence-Appellant working as domestic servant killed three family members- Trial court convicted the accused-appellant under Sections 302 and 307, IPC and death sentence was imposed- The other accused was acquitted of the charge- The High Court affirmed the order of trial court- PW 1 whose husband, son and sister were brutally killed was not a direct witness in the sense that she had not witnessed the actual attack on the three victims, the circumstances and events unfolded by the evidence of PW-1 were incompatible with the sthe evidence established beyond doubt the accused committed the crime order of the Trial court upheld.[Paras 8 to 12]
B. Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302 - Awarding of Death sentence - Killing of three members family by the appellant , working as home servant in the house- Three out of the four inmates of the house in which he was employed, were eliminated- The accused had inflicted injuries on the young deceased in such a cruel manner that his neck was practically severed from his body- Multiple injuries were inflicted on the vital parts of other victims- The cruel tendency of the appellant was writ large even in the manner of attack.- His antecedents also reveal a cruel and savage behavior on his part-The evidence on record reveals that he killed a pet bird and pierced feathers inside the nose of the hen. Therefore capital sentence confirmed.[Para 14]

JUDGMENT

P. Venkatarama Reddi, J.-The appellant-accused was working as a domestic servant in the house of retired Brigadier Shyam Lal Khanna. According to the findings of the Sessions court and the High Court, the accused put an end to the life of three members of the family including Mr. Khanna and endeavoured to kill the informant Mrs. Khanna. The ghastly incident occurred in the morning hours of 15.11.1994 in Vasant Vihar area of Dehradun. The appellant was charged under Sections 302 and 307 IPC. Another person by named Nitish with whose sister the appellant had illicit intimacy was also charged under Section 120 B IPC. The learned additional Sessions Judge, Dehradun, convicted the accused-appellant under Sections 302 and 307 IPC. For committing the offence of murder, death sentence was imposed. Under Section 307 IPC, he was sentenced to undergo R.I. for 7 years. The other accused was acquitted of the charge. The Sessions Judge made a reference under Section 366 Cr.P.C. for confirmation of death sentence. The appellant also preferred an appeal from jail. The High Court dismissed the appeal preferred by the accused-appellant and confirmed the death sentence and other sentences passed against him for the offences under Sections 302 and 307 IPC. It is against this judgment of the High Court dated 19.9.2001, the present appeal has been preferred by the accused through jail authorities.

2. One of the victims - a retired Brigadier working with ONGC at Dehradun was living in his house with his wife Rama Khanna - the informant, and his son Sarit Khanna who had returned from U.K. after completing his studies two weeks earlier. The sister of the informant by name Bishna Mathur was also staying in the house at the relevant time. The appellant was engaged as servant at their house about six months earlier. According to the prosecution, the day before the incident, it was decided to terminate his services on account of his objectionable behaviour and he was informed of their decision. A day later, he indulged in the ghastly attack against the entire family. The crucial evidence on behalf of the prosecution is that of PW 1 Smt. Rama Khanna who gave the first information report to the police soon after the occurrence. The prosecution case as unfolded by her deposition is this :

3. The accused was residing in the servant s quarter, he having been employed about six months prior to the incident. There were instances in which the accused proved to be unreliable. He had stolen money from the purse of her husband once when she and her husband went to outstation. He killed her pet sparrow and also put feathers inside the nose of her hen. She and her husband discussed about the conduct and mentality of the accused and decided to dispense with his service from 1st December. 1994. To this effect her husband informed the accused. On 14.11.1994, the accused served bed tea at about 8 A.M. to her, her husband and her sister. At that time her son was sleeping in the bed room. After the bed tea, her husband left the house for a morning walk as usual. PW 1 and her sister went into the bath rooms adjacent to each other. When she wanted to come out of the bath room, PW 1 found it was bolted from outside. From the window of the bath room. she communicated to her sister to open the bolt. As her sister just came out of the bath room, PW 1 heard her cries for about five minutes and then there was pin drop silence. At this PW 1 became suspicious that some untoward incident had happened. Then, the accused himself opened the bath room door in which PW 1 was confined; but, before fully opening the door and confronting the accused, she noticed that the accused was holding chilly powder in one hand and sword in another. The sword happened to be of her husband. As soon as the door was opened, the accused threw chilly powder on her and attacked with the sword. The sword luckily hit the golden bangle which she was wearing as a result of which her left wrist was fractured

Click Here to Read the rest of this document