The admissibility of the condemned prisoner's confession under Section 313 of the Code and the application of legal principles to determine the appropriateness of the death penalty.

JUDGMENT :

S.K. Mishra, J.

In this Criminal Reference, under Section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “the Code” for brevity), the correctness of the judgment and sentence of death recorded by the learned Ist Additional District & Sessions Judge, Nainital, in Sessions Trial No.11 of 2020, as per the judgment dated 24.11.2021, is considered along with the Criminal Appeal preferred by the condemned prisoner, who has been sentenced to death having been convicted under Sections 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as “the Penal Code” for brevity).

2. As per the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Anokhilal vs. State of M.P., (2019) 20 SCC 196, we have appointed Mr. Arvind Vashisth, the designated Senior Counsel as an Amicus Curiae to argue the case on behalf of the condemned prisoner-appellant.

3. Shown of unnecessary details, the case of the prosecution is that on 07.10.2019, one Mr. Baljeet Singh gave information to the Station House Officer, Chorgaliya, through former village pradhan that the condemned prisoner Digar Singh Koranga has committed the murder of his mother by severing her head from the rest of the body by means of sharp cutting weapon. On receiving such information, Mr. Sanjay Joshi, the then S.H.O. Chorgaliya, along with police team reached the village in question, and found the deceased Jomati Devi, mother of the condemned prisoner, lying dead with her head severed from the body. Thereafter, father of the condemned prisoner described the entire matter before the S.H.O., and stated that the incident took place on 07.10.2019 at about 09:00 AM. The S.H.O., after receiving the report from the said informant, started investigating the case. In the course of investigation, he registered the criminal case bearing FIR No.62 of 2019, prepared the inquest report, examined the witnesses, sent the dead body for post-mortem examination, seized material objects and relevant documents, and after receipt of the post-mortem report and other reports, he submitted the charge-sheet against the condemned prisoner-appellant under Sections 302 and 307 of the Penal Code. At the stage of charge, the appellant denied to have committed the offence. Hence, the charges were framed for the aforesaid provisions of the Penal Code.

4. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined twelve witnesses. P.W.1 Soban Singh Koranga is the informant in this case. He happens to be the father of the condemned prisoners, and husband of the deceased. P.W.2 Bina Bisht, P.W.3 Devika Devi, and P.W.4 Naina Koranga (the daughter-in-law of the deceased) are the eye-witnesses to the occurrence. All the other witnesses are official witnesses. P.W.5 Dr. Sinto Devsi has conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead-body of the deceased, P.W.6 S.I. Bhuwan Singh Rana, P.W.7 S.I. Deepa Joshi, are two police officers who were part of the investigation, and have also participated in different aspects of investigation, like preparation of panchnama etc. P.W.8 Indrajeet Singh is the independent witness, and is also an injured. P.W.9 Dr. Anshuman Joshi has examined the P.W.8 Indrajeet Singh. P.W.10 S.O Sanjay Joshi, P.W.11 Subhash Singh, and P.W.12 Trilok Ram Bagreth are the Investigating Officers in this case. In addition to the examination of witnesses, the prosecution also relied upon 35 different documents as exhibits, and 12 material objects. Neither any witness has been examined, nor any document has been proved on behalf of the defence.

5. Taking into consideration the statement of eye-witnesses together with the medical evidence, and also the confession of the condemned prisoner under Section 313 of the Code, the learned Ist Additional District and Sessions Judge came to the conclusion that the prosecution has established its case under Sections 302 and 307 of the Penal Code against the condemned prisoner.

6. On the question of sentence, the learned Ist Additional District and S