Judgment

CHANDRACHUD, J. :- As criminal cases go, this is an interesting case in the sense that it offers for solution a riddle of many facets. And since many answers reasonably come to mind, the accused would appear to be entitled to the benefit of that perplexity. The monsoon night of August 27, 1968 was dark, so dark indeed that the Sessions Court which sentenced five of the accused to death and the remaining five to life imprisonment made a finding that "it is an admitted case that without light it was not possible to identify the assailants". Witnesses usually place torches in the hands of dacoits and though the motive of the crime in this case was burglary, a faint attempt was made by some of the witness to show that, on occasions, a few of the accused had flashed their torches at the strategic stages. But that part of the case is clearly unworthy of belief. And so, the main question in this appeal is whether a lantern was burning at the scene of offence, a lantern hanging by a pole four or five feet high. Witnesses claim that they identified the accused in the light of that lantern.

2. The case is riddled with these mysteries : Why did the accused murder Vishwanath Panda, thei