JUDGMENT :

Sandeep Mehta, J.

1. Heard.

2. The appellant herein was arraigned as an accused in connection with FIR being Crime No. 23 of 2011, registered at Sahaspur Police Station, Dehradun, Uttarakhand for the offences punishable under sections 302, 392, 436, 506 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860¹[For short “IPC”.] and Section 25/4 of the Arms Act, 1959²[For short “Arms Act”.]. He was subjected to trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vikas Nagar, Dehradun³[Hereinafter, referred to as “trial Court”.] in Sessions Trial No. 70/2011. The trial Court vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 4th September, 2015, convicted the appellant for the aforementioned offences and sentenced him in terms indicated below: -

3. Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred an appeal⁴[Criminal Appeal No. 333 of 2015.] before the Uttarakhand High Court⁵[Hereinafter, being referred to as “High Court”.] for assailing his conviction and the sentences awarded to him. The trial Court also forwarded a reference⁶[Criminal Reference No. 01 of 2015.] under Section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973⁷[For short, “CrPC”.] for confirmation of the death sentence. The learned division bench of the High Court vide judgment dated 1st June, 2018 dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellant and answered the reference in the affirmative thereby confirming the death sentence awarded by the trial Court. The judgment dated 1st June, 2018 rendered by the High Court is the subject matter of challenge in these appeals by special leave.

Brief Facts: -

4. The prosecution case, in brief, is that one Sanjay Kumar Guleria, was running a motorcycle showroom-cum-workshop under the name and style of “Hariom Automobile” at Selakui wherein the appellant was employed as a head mechanic. Besides him, Pradeep (PW-2), Gulfam (PW-13), Rajesh and Abid were working as helpers and trainees in the showroom. One Lalita, was also employed at the showroom and was entrusted with supervisory duties at the counter.

5. A couple of months prior to the date of the incident, Lalita had made a complaint regarding the conduct of the appellant to Sanjay Guleria, pursuant to which the appellant was removed from service. The appellant repeatedly approached Sanjay Guleria requesting that he be reinstated in employment, however, Sanjay Guleria refused to re-engage him. The appellant consequently developed resentment and bore a grudge against Sanjay Guleria on account of his termination from service.

6. On 10th February, 2011 at about 4:25 p.m., the appellant arrived at the showroom premises and stabbed Sanjay Guleria on his neck with a big knife which he had concealed in his back pocket of his pant. Subsequently he accosted Lalita, who tried to run away from the showroom for saving her own life, but the appellant pursued her while shouting that everything had happened because of her and that she would not be spared. The appellant caught hold of Lalita in a nearby empty plot and inflicted multiple blows upon her with the knife, resulting in her death at the spot. Sanjay Guleria, who had sustained grievous injuries in the assault, collapsed after coming out of the showroom and succumbed to the injuries sustained by him.