Back
JOYMALYA BAGCHI, ANANYA BANDYOPADHYAY
State Of West Bengal – Appellant
Versus
Sujit Dhali – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Joymalya Bagchi, J. - The death reference and the criminal appeals have arisen out of the impugned judgment and order dated 08.12.2016, 09.12.2016 and 12.12.2016 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, 7th Court, Barasat, North 24 Parganas in Session Trial No.04(01) 2013 arising out of Session case No.32(12) 2012 convicting the appellants Provash Dhali, Sujit Dhali and Samir Mondal for the commission of offences punishable under sections 449, 120B and 302 IPC in additional to conviction of Provash Dhali under section 25 of the Arms Act and sentencing them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence punishable under section 449 IPC, rigorous imprisonment for life and pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence punishable under section 120B IPC, sentence of death as well as fine of Rs.50,000/- each, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years for the offence punishable under section 302 IPC and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to
Medical evidence on record does not wholly rule out the ocular version of eye-witnesses so as to render the prosecution case improbable.
The court upheld the conviction for murder but commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment, emphasizing the need for extreme caution in imposing capital punishment.
Point of Law - Court has made an attempt to cull out certain aggravating and mitigating circumstances and it has been held that it was only in ‘rarest of rare’ cases, when collective conscience of th....
In a murder case, the court must consider both aggravating and mitigating circumstances before imposing a sentence. The death sentence should be imposed only in the rarest of rare cases.
The court ruled that to impose a death sentence, the prosecution must conclusively demonstrate exceptional circumstances warranting such a penalty, which was not established in this case.
The appellants' conviction for murder was altered to culpable homicide not amounting to murder due to lack of intent, despite their involvement in the unlawful assembly and rioting.
The court determined that while the appellants participated in an unlawful assembly leading to death, their intent was not murder, qualifying the offense under culpable homicide not amounting to murd....
The death penalty can be commuted to life imprisonment if mitigating factors outweigh aggravating circumstances, particularly demonstrating lack of premeditation or extreme brutality in the crime.
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
