J.S. Narang, J. - This judgment would dispose of Murder Reference No. 3 of 2004 and Criminal Appeal No. 556-DB of 2004, as the judgment of conviction, dated May 27, 2004 and, order of sentence, dated May 31, 2004, are under scrutiny and challenge.

2. Murder is a heinous act by which a life is brought to an end prior to the period for which it may have continued to exist. Such act has always been looked down upon by the society since ages. The very usage of the word contemplates an act committed by a third person qua the first person. Such act has been considered and has been delved upon by the society through legislation, executive act and the judicial scrutiny, which are the creations of the society for its own governance.

3. No doubt, the life of a human being is lost by virtue of various acts which may be committed in the act of saving the life and which may be committed without any intention but the result of the act is such that the life is lost. The murderous act is entirely distinct therefrom. It is this act which has been subjected to the restraints, constraints and scrutiny by the society. Such act having been committed by a person, the society has provided punishment by its legislative act but for awarding such punishment the procedure has been prescribed to test the truth before the person is held guilty. Such determination has been made the onerous duty of the judicial system created by the society and applied unto itself. This act has been further subjected to the rule of prudence for which guidance has been provided by codifying the procedure and also regulating the same by virtue of legislative and executive action.

4. It has been seen over the years that the aforestated acts on the part of the society did leave some grey areas, which have fallen into the domain of judicial dispensation to form guide-lines for future generation. The cardinal principles are followed even today i.e. testing such act by the one, upon whom the onerous duty has been casted. In this endeavour, the precedents are also tested and re-tested, sometimes they are explained and sometimes they are extended to bring within the circumference the factual disclosures of a particular act. The application of legal acumen becomes more acute when the act of murder, if established, has to be further weighed for taking the life of the person who acted in committing the heinous crime. Murder is always linked with the crime but the degree of crime has to be examined vis-a-vis the facts and the circumstances unrevelled by the prosecution. The judicial system has also to perform the duty to scrutinise and appreciate the act and conduct of the prosecution in establishing the guilt. The Courts have performed such duties on being guided by the factual dispensation by ultimate equilibrium arrived at in their conscience by applying the rigour of caution and emaculate analysis of facts divulged.

5. Giving life is a pious act, taking away life is looked at with contempt and scorn. For the later act, the rigour of the law is cautious, contemporate and impeccably slow in regulating the scale for reaching the conclusion. Such conclusion, once having been finally derived at, would eliminate the person put in the scale. No doubt, steps have been provided to test each and every nook and corner of such decision for which aids have been provided by the society.

6. In the case at hand it is not one life but eight lives have been eliminated, who were closely related to each other with the common blood of man and wife. The charged person is no one else but the same blood line. It is the strange phenomena that each human being has a different mind, different approach and the acts committed are completely distinct. However, the reflexes may be the same but the acts and the projections are different even if there is relationship by virtue of common blood and that the blood line is the same.

7. It shall be apposite to notice the description of the family by way of drawi