Back
2014 Supreme(All) 2781
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Amar Saran, Sunita Agarwal, JJ.
Ravindra Kumar Verma - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Capital Cases No. - 2880 of 2013
Decided On : 02-05-2014
For the Appellant :- From Jail,Ashish Pandey,Vijay Singh Gour,Vinod Kumar Singh Parmar
For the Respondent:- A.G.A
The burden of proof in a criminal case lies with the prosecution, and the prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. However, in certain circumstances, the burden of proof may shift to the accused to offer a reasonable explanation for his actions.
Headnote:
CRIMINAL APPEAL - SECTION 302 IPC - DEATH SENTENCE - MODIFICATION TO LIFE IMPRISONMENT - CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE - SECTION 106 OF THE EVIDENCE ACT - BURDEN OF PROOF - MOTIVE - MITIGATING AND AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, Ravindra Kumar Verma, was convicted and sentenced to death by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court no.7, Ghaziabad, for the murder of his five children and causing serious injuries to his wife. The prosecution's case was that the appellant was in an intoxicated state and killed his children in a fit of rage. The appellant denied the charges and claimed that he was unconscious at the time of the incident.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was the perpetrator of the crime. The court relied on circumstantial evidence, including the fact that the appellant was the only person in the house at the time of the incident, the murder weapon was found in the house, and the appellant had a history of alcohol abuse. The court also found that the appellant had failed to offer a reasonable explanation for his actions under Section 106 of the Evidence Act.
Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was the perpetrator of the crime. 2. Whether the appellant was entitled to the benefit of doubt. 3. Whether the sentence of death was appropriate.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was the perpetrator of the crime. The court relied on circumstantial evidence, including the fact that the appellant was the only person in the house at the time of the incident, the murder weapon was found in the house, and the appellant had a history of alcohol abuse. The court also found that the appellant had failed to offer a reasonable explanation for his actions under Section 106 of the Evidence Act. The court further held that the appellant was not entitled to the benefit of doubt as the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court also held that the sentence of death was not appropriate in the circumstances of the case and reduced it to life imprisonment.
Final Decision: The court upheld the conviction of the appellant but modified the sentence from death to life imprisonment.
Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J
Heard Shri Vijay Singh Gour, learned counsel for the appellant, Shri Akhliesh Singh, learned Government Advocate and Shri Anand Tiwari and Shri R.K. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present capital appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 27.5.2013 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court no.7, Ghaziabad. By judgment and order dated 27.5.2013 passed in S.T. No. 1523 of 2009, the appellant was convicted and sentenced to death under Section 302 I.P.C. with a fine of Rs. One lac.. In default, he has to undergo additional imprisonment of five years. It was further directed that against P.W.5 Smt. Durgawati wife of the appellant the proceedings under Section 344 Cr.P.C. shall be initiated. The death reference no. 8 of 2013 was also sent by the trial court for confirmation.
3. The prosecution case is that a written report was submitted by one Amit Kumar Verma son of Ram Pravesh Verma on 8.6.2009 at about 8 A.M. In the report, it was stated by the informant Anil Kumar Verma that on 8.6.2009 at about 6.30 A.M. in the morning when he reached the house of his elder brother Ravindra Kumar Verma,i.e. the appellant, he saw him sitting at the door of his house. There was blood in his hands. When the informant asked him about the cause of blood, he did not reply. The informant went inside the house and found that Anjali aged about 13 years; Priti aged about 11 years; Priyanka aged about 9 years;(three daughters of Ravindra Kumar Verma) and son Devraj aged about 5 years were lying in a pool of blood in one room of the house. In another room, his sister-in-law Smt. Durgawati aged about 35 years and youngest son of the appellant Yuvraj aged about 9 months were lying on the floor.
4. He further stated in the report that his brother was mentally disturbed and alcoholic and thus at times he used to loose his mental balance. Earlier also he made an attempt on the life of his family members. He used to say that one day he would kill all of them. Today, he was passing through the same mental state and in a fit or rage, he killed his five children by causing serious injuries on their head. The informant further stated that his sister-in-law made an effort to save her children, however, the appellant also caused serious injuries to her. She was admitted in G.T.B. hospital in serious condition.The appellant Ravindra Kumar Verma also tried to injure himself at various parts of his body through sharp edged weapon(blade). On the said written report, the chik F.I.R. exhibit Ka 2 was lodged and G.D. entry Rapat no.10 was made as exhibit ka 3.
5. The inquest of Yuvraj aged about 9 months, Km. Anjali aged about 12 years and Priyanka aged about 10 years was done by S.I. Rajendra Kumar Verma, P.W.9 exhibited as (Exhibits Ka.9, Ka 10 and Ka 11); respectively. The inquest of Km. Priti and Devraj was done by S.I. Ramvir Singh, P.W.10 exhibited as Ka 19 and Ka 20; respectively. The postmortem was conducted by Dr. Prem Prakash Verma, P.W.7 on 8.6.2009. The prosecution in support of its case has examined R.P. Verma, P.W.1 father of the appellant;Awadesh Verma P.W.2,brother of the appellant; Amit Kumar Verma, the informant (P.W.3) and brother of the appellant; Subhash Verma, P.W.4 brother of the appellant and Smt. Durgawati P.W.5, wife of the appellant as witnesses of fact.
6. P.W.6 Surendra Kumar, head Constable was examined who had deposed that he was deployed at the Police station, Vijaynagar on 8.6.2009 and chik F.I.R. was lodged by him on the basis of written report given by Amit Kumar Verma,the informant. The entries were made in G.D. and thereafter he left for place of occurrence of the incident.
7. Dr. Prem Prakash Verma,Additional C.M.O. was examined as P.W.7. He had deposed that he commenced postmortem of the deceased Km. Anjai at about 5 P.M. In continuation of the same, he also conducted the postmortem of deceased Yuvraj, Km. Priti, Km. Priyanka and Devraj. The injuries found on the bodies
