In death penalty cases, courts must balance aggravating and mitigating circumstances, emphasizing rehabilitation and the need for a complete evidentiary chain showing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT :

Rajnish Kumar, J.

(1) The instant Capital Case No. 4 of 2021 arises out of the reference made by the trial Court/Special Judge (POCSO Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Lucknow under Section 366 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Cr.P.C.’) to this Court for confirmation of the death sentence of convict Premchandra alias Pappu Dixit (here-in-after referred as convict/appellant) awarded by means of judgment and order dated 30.09.2021 in Sessions Trial No. 399 of 2020 (C.N.R. No. UPLK01-003380 2020): State Vs. Premchandra alias Pappu Dixit, arising out of Case Crime No. 164 of 2020, under Sections 376 (Ka) (Kha), 364, 302 of INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (hereinafter referred to as ‘I.P.C.’) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as ‘POCSO Act, 2012’), Police Station Madiyaon, District Lucknow.

(2) Criminal Appeal No. 1626 of 2021 has been preferred by convict Premchandra alias Pappu Dixit against the aforesaid judgment and order dated 30.09.2021. Jail Appeal No. 1579 of 2021 was also preferred on behalf of convict Premchandra alias Pappu Dixit against the aforesaid judgment and order, which has been consigned to record with liberty to the convict/appellant Premchandra alias Pappu Dixit to pursue his Criminal Appeal No. 1626 of 2021 through his Counsel Shri Rajesh Kumar Dwivedi by means of order dated 14.03.2022 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

(3) Section 366 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 provides that when the Court of Session passes a sentence of death, the proceedings shall be submitted to the High Court, and the sentence shall not be executed unless it is confirmed by the High Court. Section 368 of the CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE , 1973 provides power of High Court to confirm sentence or annul conviction. Proviso to Section 368 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 provides that no order of confirmation shall be made under this section until the period allowed for preferring an appeal has expired, or, if an an appeal is presented within such period, until such appeal is disposed of. In the present case, an appeal has been filed by the convict/ appellant also, therefore, the said appeal is to be disposed of before taking decision on reference made by learned trial Court. Thus, both Capital Case No. 4 of 2021 and Criminal Appeal No. 1626 of 2021 arising out of one and the same judgment and order dated 30.09.2021 have been clubbed and are being decided together by means of this common judgment and order.

(4) The prosecution case, as per the F.I.R., is that on 16.02.2020, the marriage of daughter of Rajkumar Mishra of the village of complainant Satya Prakash Dixit was in S.R. Marriage Lawn, Daud Nagar, Near Jaglal Petrol Pump, Lucknow, in which wife of the complainant and his sister-in-law (bhabhi) along with children had come. At about 07:00 in the evening of 16.02.2020, the real nephew of the complainant, Premchandra alias Pappu Dixit, son of Ram Prakash Dixit, took his daughter aged about five months from his wife on the pretext of playing and went away. For a long time, Premchandra alias Pappu Dixit did not return along with his daughter, therefore, his wife searched for her but she could not find her. After extensive search for a long time, it came to light that his daughter has been found lying in an unconscious condition amidst the bushes of a vacant plot at some distance from the marriage lawn, who was got admitted in K.G.M.U., Trauma Centre, where his daughter died. Thus, the nephew of the complainant