R. Basant, J.

1. (i) Has the guilt of the accused been established beyond doubt by the circumstances proved by the prosecution.

(ii) Is the instant case one that belongs to the category of rarest of rare cases, where the alternative options of punishment are unquestionably foreclosed and a sentence of death has to be imposed as laid down in Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980)2 SCC 684.?

(iii) Does the decision in Swamy Shraddananda (2) v. State of Karnataka (2008(13) SCC 767) raise the bar further in the attempt to identify the rarest of rare cases where a sentence of death can be imposed and is liable to be confirmed?

These questions arise for consideration in this Death Sentence Reference and the Criminal Appeal, which we dispose of by this common judgment.

2. Navas @ Mulanavas, a person aged about 28 years has been found guilty, convicted and sentenced in a prosecution for the offences punishable under Sections 449, 302 and 309 IPC. He faces a sentence of death for the offence under Section 302 IPC, sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and fine of Rs.1,000/- under Section 449 IPC and simple imprisonment for a period of two months and a fine of Rs.500/- for the offence under Section 309 IPC. Default sentences have also been imposed.

3. The prosecution alleged that the appellant had gained access into the house of the deceased persons - four in number, by making a hole on the eastern wall of the house on the night of 3/4.11.2005. He allegedly caused the death of Latha, a woman aged about 39 years, her husband Ramachandran aged about 45 years, their daughter Chithra aged about 11 years and her mother- in-law, Karthiayani Amma aged about 80 years. The accused thereafter allegedly attempted to commit suicide by cutting the vein of his left wrist. Investigation commenced with suo motu FIR, Exhibit P23 registered by PW30, the local A.S.I. and culminated with the final report submitted by PW32, who completed the investigation.

4. The accused denied the offences alleged against him and thereupon the prosecution examined Pws 1 to 32 and proved Exhibits P1 to P45 series. M.Os.1 to 122 were also marked by the prosecution. The accused did not examine any defence witnesses; but proved Exhibits D1 to D5.

5. An appellate judgment must be read in continuation of the judgment of the trial court. We have been taken through the evidence of PWs 1 to 32, Exhibits P1 to P45 series and Exhibits D1 to D5. The relevant material objects have also been perused by us. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that it is unnecessary to attempt a re-narration of the evidence of the prosecution witnesses as well as the prosecution and the defence exhibits.

6. The prosecution version which they attempted to substantiate by the evidence referred above can be summarised as follows.

7. Deceased Ramachandran and Latha were residing in the house which is the scene of occurrence. They have a child aged 11 years, by name Chithra. The mother of Ramachandran, Karthiayani Amma was also residing along with them. It is suggested that Ramachandran had some psychiatric ailments and was on medicines. It is further suggested that Latha had dissatisfactions in the marital life and that she was involved in extra marital relationships. The accused was known to the family. He had initially helped the family to get out of certain involvements which Latha had with certain others. He had gained the confidence of Latha and Ramachandran. Unfortunately, the relationship between Latha and the accused had drifted and it had entered prohibited zones/domains. She allegedly shared intimacy including physical intimacy with the accused. It is even suggested that Latha had become pregnant in the relationship between her and the accused. But that pregnancy had to be aborted. At some point of time, the accused allegedly came to learn from Latha that Chithra, the child born was not really begotten in her relationship with Ramachandran; but Chithra was brought up a