State of U. P. vs Sarvan - 2022 Supreme(All) 1023

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(All) 1023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Ramesh Sinha, Saroj Yadav, JJ.
State of U.P. – Appellant
Versus
Sarvan – Respondent
Capital Case No. 3 of 2017, Criminal Appeal No. – 1540, 1552 of 2017
Decided On : 06-09-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Respondent: Manjusha Kapil

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 323, and 201 - Conviction and sentencing of two accused for heinous crimes including multiple murders and injuries to victims - Convict/appellant Sarvan was sentenced to death for killing his wife, children, and neighbor; conviction upheld for instigation and participation by co-accused Suman - Evidence supported by eyewitness accounts and medical reports corroborating the violent nature of the crimes and the premeditated intent of the accused. (Paras 76-100)

(B) Evidence - Eyewitness testimony - Reliance on accounts from the informant and injured, establishing their proximity and presence during the commission of the crime - Testimonies scrutinized under the principles surrounding credibility of injured witnesses. (Paras 59-62)

(C) Sentencing - Determination of 'rarest of rare' circumstances due to the brutality of the crime and its social implications - Convict's potential threat to society assessed - Death penalty confirmed based on aggravating factors significantly outweighing any mitigating circumstances presented. (Paras 76-90)

Table of Content
1. introduction to the case and charges. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. details regarding the crime and investigation. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20)
3. testimonies of prosecution witnesses. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25)
4. arguments by the appellants. (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33)
5. arguments by the state. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39)
6. court's analysis of evidence. (Para 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46)
7. witness credibility and evidential support. (Para 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52)
8. court's reflection on the nature of the crime. (Para 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59)
9. medical examinations and evidence corroborating testimonies. (Para 60 , 61 , 62 , 63)
10. concluding remarks on the witnesses and evidence. (Para 64 , 65 , 66 , 67)
11. final considerations on sentencing. (Para 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76)
12. statement on the death penalty being confirmed. (Para 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82)
13. overall conclusion and commentary on judicial principles. (Para 83 , 84 , 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 89 , 90 , 91 , 92 , 93 , 94 , 95 , 96 , 97 , 98)
14. final directives and communications. (Para 99 , 100 , 101)

JUDGMENT :

Ramesh Sinha, J.

(A) INTRODUCTION

1. Two accused, namely, Sarvan and Smt. Suman, were tried by the Special Judge, C.B.I. Court No.2/Additional Sessions Judge, Lucknow in Sessions Trial No 754 of 2009 : State Vs. Sarvan and another, arising out of Case Crime No. 265 of 2009, under Sections 302 , 201 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (in short, referred hereinafter as ‘I.P.C.’), Police Station Mohanlalganj, District Lucknow.

2. Vide judgment and order dated 29.08.2017, the Special Judge, C.B.I. Court No.2/Additional Sessions Judge, Lucknow, convicted and sentenced accused, Sarvan and Smt. Suman, in the manner as stated hereinbelow :-

I. Under Section 323 I.P.C. to undergo one year’s rigorous imprisonment;

II. Under Section 201 I.P.C. to undergo four years’ R.I. and a fine of Rs.2000/-. In default of payment of fine to undergo additional one month’s imprisonment; and

III. Under section 302 I.P.C. to be hanged to death till he is dead and fine of Rs.5000/-. In default of payment of fine to undergo additional five months’ imprisonment.

Accused Smt. Suman

I. Under section 201 I.P.C. to undergo four years’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2000/-. In default of payment of fine to undergo additional one month’s imprisonment.

All the sentences were directed to run concurrently and the period of incarceration was directed to be set off against the sentence of imprisonment.

3. Aggrieved with their aforesaid conviction and sentences, accused Smt. Suman has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 1540 of 2017 : Smt. Suman vs. State, whereas accused Sarvan preferred Criminal Appeal No. 1552 of 2017 : Sarvan Vs. State.

4. Capital Case No. 3 of 2017 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/appellant Sarvan.

5. Since the above-captioned capital sentence reference and criminal appeals arise out of a common factual matrix and impugned judgment dated 29.08.2017, this Court proceeds to decide the same by the common judgment.

(B) CASE OF THE PROSECUTION

6. The informant Kolai (P.W.1) was resident of Village Gaura, Police Station Mohanlalganj, District Lucknow. In front of his house, the house of Sarvan (convict/appellant) was situated. It has been alleged by the informant Kolai (P.W.1) that a gossip/talk spread throughout the village that Sarvan (convict/appellant) had an illicit relationship with his bhabhi (sister-in-law) Suman, on account of which, there was a lot of quarrel between Sarvan (convict/appellant) and his wife Smt. Santoshi (deceased). Often this quarrel escalated and Sarvan (convict/ appellant) would beat his wife (deceased Santoshi). Smt. Madhuri (informant’s wife) would usually intervene in such sit