2009 Supreme(SC) 890

2009(3) Supreme 760
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Bombay High Court)
Dr. Arijit Pasayat and Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, JJ.
Ankush Maruti Shinde and others — Appellants
versus
State of Maharashtra — Respondent
Criminal Appeal Nos. 1008-09 of 2007
With
Criminal Appeal Nos. 881-882 of 2009
(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) Nos.8457-58 of 2008)
Decided on : 30-04-2009

IMPORTANT POINT
Undue sympathy to impose inadequate sentence would do more harm to the justice system.

Headnote:(a) Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 9 – T.I. Parade – If potholes were to be ferreted out from the proceedings of the Magistrate holding such parades possibly no T I Parade can escape from one or two lapses – T. I. Parades are meant for investigation purposes – Object of conducting TI Parade is to enable the witnesses to satisfy themselves that the prisoner whom they suspect is really the one who was seen by them in connection with the commission of the crime; and to satisfy the investigating authorities that the suspect is the real person whom the witnesses had seen in connection with the said occurrence. (Para 7)

        (2007)2 SCC 310 – Relied upon.

        (b) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 – Organised crime or mass murders of innocent people would call for imposition of death sentence as deterrence – Undue sympathy to impose inadequate sentence would do more harm to the justice system – Punishment should be proportionate to crime. (Paras 14 to 16)

        (1987) 2 SCR 710; AIR 1991 SC 1463; 402 US 183: 28 L.D. 2d 711; (1994)4 SCC 353 – Relied upon.

        (c) Administration of Criminal Justice – Crimes relating to offences against women, dacoity, kidnapping, misappropriation of public money, treason and other offences involving moral turpitude or moral delinquency which have great impact on social order, and public interest, per se require exemplary treatment – Any liberal attitude or taking too sympathetic view will be result-wise counter productive in the long run and against societal interest. (Para 20)

        (1994)2 SCC 220; (1996)2 SCC 175; (2005)2 SCC 712; (1980)2 SCC 684; (1983)3 SCC 470; (2002)5 SCC 234 – Relied upon.

        (d) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 – The murders were not only cruel, brutal but were diabolic – Five members of an unknown family including four of tender age were brutally murdered – Victims were defenseless and the attack was without any provocation – A minor girl of about fifteen years was dragged in the open field, gang raped and done to death – There can be no doubt that the case at hand falls under the rarest of rare category – All accused deserve death sentence. (Paras 32 and 33)

       Facts of the case :

        1. On 5/6/2003 Trambak and all his family members as well as the guest Bharat More were chitchatting after dinner and at about 10.30 p.m. seven to eight unknown persons entered his hut and all of them were wearing banyan and half pant and they started threatening the family members. They demanded and collected money as well as ornaments. Thereafter they went out of the hut and consumed liquor.

        2. After some time they re-entered the hut with weapons to rob the house members and collect more money and ornaments etc. They assaulted the male family members and raped female members by taking them out. They walked on the bodies of the injured and unconscious male members and left only when satisfied that all the victims were dead. Only Manoj (PW1) and his mother Vimalabai (PW 8) survived. They are the eye witnesses to the prosecution case.

        3. The Trial Court convicted the accused persons. Because of the award of death sentence, reference was made to the High Court. Accused persons also filed appeals.

        4. High Court, while upholding the conviction and the death sentence of accused Nos.1, 2 & 4, altered the sentence in respect of the accused Nos. 3, 5 & 6 to life sentence with fine. Accused Nos. 1, 2 & 4 were also convicted for offence punishable under Section 376(2)(g) of the Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years. The order of conviction and sentence under Section 376(2)(g) in respect of accused nos.3, 5 & 6 was set aside. The accused persons were convicted for offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 and sentenced to five years’ imprisonment each. They were also convicted under Section 397 read with Sections 395 & 396 IPC.

       Finding of the Court :

        There can be no doubt that the case at hand falls under the rarest of rare category and all accused deserve death sentence.

       Result : Appeals by accused dismissed and that by the State allowed.