Back
2010 (7) Supreme 328
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
V.S. Sirpurkar and A.K. Patnaik, JJ.
Sunder Singh — Appellant
versus
State of Uttaranchal — Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1164 of 2005
Decided on : 16-9-2010
Death Sentence-Award of –Challenge thereagainst-Instantly five persons had lost their life while the sixth person, a helpless lady, has to live her life with 70% burn injuries-The murder was committed in a cruel, grotesque and diabolical manner- When all the members of the family were having their food, accused poured petrol in the room and set it to fire and went to the extent of closing door also- It was clear that accused had done this with pre-meditated and cold-blooded mind, as he had taken the trouble of carrying petrol to his own cousin’s house- As if all this was not sufficient, he was also carrying a sword, and probably prepared himself to fire on the complainant party, as a pistol with two bullets in it was also found on the spot-The accused shown extreme depravity of mind in causing a sword blow on the neck of B, who himself was burnt and was trying to escape- A murder by burning, by itself, would be a very cruel act- The accused showed scant respect for the law by remaining absconding for about 12 years and only because of that he could not be brought to books- The balance sheet of the aggravating circumstances exceeded the mitigating circumstances- Death sentence was rightly awarded by Trial Court and was rightly confirmed by High Court-Appeal dismissed. (Paras 35, 36)
Facts of the Case :
Appellant was prosecuted herein in the instant case for causing death of five persons of a family by throwing petrol in their room and after setting fire by torch, shutting the door of room. Trial Court convicted appellant awarding death sentence to him. Appeal thereagainst was Dismissed by High Court.
2. Present appeal has been filed against said order of conviction.
Findings of the Court :
The prosecution basically relied on the evidence of PW-1 . She being a natural witness there could be no dispute about her presence on the spot. She was also an injured witness as she herself suffered 70% burns . Even though there were undoubtedly some contradictions and omissions in evidence of PW-1 and the dying declaration but they were not substantial enough so as to affect the credibility of her evidence. Dying declaration of PW-1 was voluntary, truthful and uninfluenced by any other factor. Sessions Judge as well as High court chose to accept the evidence of witness who had survived 70 % burns. High Court also endorsed view of the Sessions Judge that she was wholly reliable witness and there was no requirement of corroboration to her evidence from any other witness. In his dying declaration, “P” specifically alleged that while he along with other members of his family were having food, at that time accused came towards his house with a torch and he poured the petrol from a jerry cane and closed the door. After throwing the torch he closed the door resulting in the room catching fire. There was no reason to reject dying declaration again solely for the reason that there was no endorsement of the doctor on the dying declaration regarding the fit condition of the injured to make statement. Trial Court and appellate Court committed no error in relying on dying declaration of “P” . Considering evidence led by prosecution through PW1 which was corroborated by her dying declaration as also the dying declaration (Exhibit Ka-6) of P and other circumstances proved on record held that it was accused and accused alone whose guilt had been proved beyond all reasonable doubts. No reason was found to interfere with impugned judgments of Trial Court and High Court. Appeal was dismissed.
Result : Appeal dismissed.
JUDGMENT
V.S. Sirpurkar, J. —
1. Appellant herein challenges the judgment of the High Court affirming the judgment passed by the Sessions Court. The Sessions Judge convicted the appellant/accused Sunder Singh for offences under Sections 302, 307 and 436, Indian Penal Code (IPC). While he was awarded the death sentence along with a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one year, he was given the punishment of seven years along with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one year separately on the other two counts.
2. The incident in this case had taken place on 30.6.1989 in village Mahargheti, Patwari Circle Dangoli in the newly formed District Bageshwar (which was part of District Almora at the time of incident). In this ghastly incident, Pratap Singh, his wife Nandi Devi, his elder son Balwant Singh (aged about 28 years), another son Prem Singh (aged about 19 years), daughter Kamla (aged about 16 years) lost their lives while wife of Balwant Singh, namely, Vimla Devi (PW-1) sustained grievous burn injuries. Five victims who lost their lives including Balwant Singh were roasted alive and died either on the spot or while being taken to the hospital or in the hospital. Balwant Singh, however, was almost beheaded while he also suffered the burn injuries. The prosecution alleged that this incident took place at about 10 p.m. when all the victims were taking their dinner in the ground floor room of their house. The appellant/accused came there with jerry can containing petrol and burning torch and threw the petrol in the room and after setting fire by torch, he shut the door of the room. Though Balwant Singh was in flames he managed to come out of the room by opening the door. However, as soon as he came out of the room, the accused who was still waiting there gave him a sword blow on the neck because of which he fell down dead out side the house. The other five family members who sustained severe burns also died barring Vimla Devi who alone survived. Nandi Devi died on the way to the Primary Health Centre at Baijnath while Pratap Singh also died there itself. Kamla and Prem Singh died in the District hospital, Almora later on, where they were shifted from Baijnath.
3. Informant Kheem Singh (PW-2) prepared a written report and handed over to the Circle Patwari, Hyat Singh (PW-13). In fact Hyat Singh (PW-13) came almost immediately after the incident and so did the other witnesses like Chanar Singh (PW-3) and Rewadhar (PW-4). At the time when they reached the spot almost simultaneously, Pratap Singh was alive, who told these witnesses that accused Sunder Singh had burned them by throwing petrol from jerry can and by torching the house thereafter. Even Vimla Devi (PW-1), the wife of Balwant Singh told Hyat Singh (PW-13) about the incident and also about the attack on Balwant Singh by the accused. Hyat Singh (PW-13) started the investigation. He inspected the burnt house and the spot where Balwant Singh’s body was lying. He found that Balwant Singh was dead and had suffered a serious injury on his neck. The other injured barring Balwant Singh were sent first to the Primary Health Centre, Baijnath. Nandi Devi, however, died even before reaching the Primary Health Centre, Baijnath, while Pratap Singh is said to have died after reaching the Health Centre. Dr. K.C. Joshi (PW-12) examined Vimla Devi (PW-1) and noted the injuries suffered by her, so also Kamla and Prem Singh were examined by him, and he noted their injuries in the medical certificates (Exhibits Ka-9, Ka-10 and Ka-11). Thereafter, the injured were sent to District Hospital, Almora in view of the seriousness of their injuries. When the three injured were at District Hospital, Almora, the dying declarations of Prem Singh and Vimla Devi (PW-1) were recorded on 1.7.1989 by Narender Singh Patel (PW-9), Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Baramandal, District Almora. Before this, Hyat Singh (PW-13) had complet
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
