Back
State of U. P. – Appellant
Versus
Deen Dayal Tiwari – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ramesh Sinha, J.
(A) INTRODUCTION
1. The accused, Deen Dayal Tiwari, was tried by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.5, Faizabad in Sessions Trial No.24 of 2013 : State Vs. Deen Dayal Tiwari, arising out of Case Crime No. 746 of 2011, under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station Pura Kalandar, district Faizabad.
2. Vide judgment and order dated 29.01.2014/30.01.2014, the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.5, Faizabad, convicted the appellant-Deen Dayal Tiwari under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced him to be hanged to death till he is dead and with fine of Rs.50,000/-.
3. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order dated 29.01.2014/30.01.2014, convict/appellant, Deen Dayal Tiwari, preferred Criminal Appeal No. 1776 of 2016 : Deen Dayal Tiwari Vs. State of U.P.
4. Capital Case No. 1 of 2014 arises out of the Reference made by the learned trial Court under Section 366 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to this Court for confirmation of the death sentence of convict Deen Dayal Tiwari.
5. Since the above-captioned capital sentence reference and appeal arise out of a common factual matrix and impugned judgment and order dated 29.01.2
Point of law: Convict/appellant is a menace to the society and there is no chance of his rehabilitation or reformation and no leniency in imposing punishment is called for.
Offence of Murder – Death Sentence Confirmed - Imposition of death sentence in ‘rarest of rare’ cases - Instant case falls in category of 'rarest of rare case', warranting capital punishment. Hence d....
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.
In terms of Section 354(3) of Cr.P.C., it is clear that normally imprisonment for life is to be awarded and only in any exceptional circumstances death sentence is required to be awarded.
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.
(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....
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....
The case reiterates that appropriate punishment for heinous crimes must reflect societal values, and in this instance, a modified life sentence of at least 20 years was deemed essential rather than t....
The court ruled that corroborative evidence is essential in murder cases, especially when convicting based on eyewitness testimony.
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
