Back
PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI, RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI
State of Rajasthan-State – Appellant
Versus
Nokharam @ Bharmaram – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.)
The accused-appellant in this appeal, through Jail, has been convicted and sentenced as below vide judgment of conviction dated 23.09.2021 and order of sentence dated 27.09.2021 (in Special Sessions Case No.42/2020 - CIS No.42/2020 - State of Rajasthan v. Nokaram @ Bharmaram), passed by the learned Special Judge, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Cases & Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 Cases, Sirohi.
| Offence | Sentence |
| Section 5 (j)(iv)(m)/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short, ‘POCSO Act’) Alternatively, under Section 376(a)(ab) IPC. AND Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, ‘IPC’) | Death Sentence |
1.1. As indicated above, the accused-appellant had been convicted under the aforementioned offences, and while doing so, the learned Trial Court, being the Court of Sessions, had passed the death sentence against the accused-appellant vide the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, therefore, in accordance with Section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and thus, the matter has been submitted before this Hon'ble High Court for confirm
The court ruled that the death penalty is not warranted in this case, emphasizing the need for a balance between aggravating and mitigating circumstances, ultimately commuting the sentence to 30 year....
The court ruled that corroborative evidence is essential in murder cases, especially when convicting based on eyewitness testimony.
The imposition of the death penalty requires the statutory provision of special reasons, and a balancing of aggravating and mitigating circumstances must be conducted.
(1) Constitutional guarantees of equality before law, protection of life and personal liberty, protection in respect of conviction, and protection against arrest and detention, do not expand into a c....
The court ruled that the death penalty is not warranted as the case does not fall under the 'rarest of rare' category, emphasizing the need for special reasons for such a sentence.
Circumstantial evidence, particularly the 'last seen' principle, can suffice for conviction in rape and murder cases yet demands rigorous scrutiny for reliability.
The court affirmed multiple convictions for murder and conspiracy, emphasizing the nature of the crimes and the relationship between the accused as central to the ruling.
Death sentence – Standardisation of sentencing would not be possible because no two criminal cases are identical and standardisation would leave no room for judicial discretion.
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
