Back
RITU BAHRI, ALOK KUMAR VERMA
State of Uttarakhand – Appellant
Versus
Sartaj – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conviction details and background (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. accused's claims and counterarguments (Para 7 , 10 , 16 , 21) |
| 3. prosecution and defense arguments presented. (Para 9 , 13) |
| 4. court's observations on evidence reliability. (Para 11) |
| 5. evaluation of evidence and witness credibility (Para 14 , 15 , 20 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 6. judicial discretion in sentencing analyzed. (Para 25 , 26 , 28) |
| 7. judicial discretion in imposing sentences (Para 29 , 30 , 32 , 34) |
| 8. final sentencing and judicial orders (Para 51 , 52 , 53 , 54) |
| 9. final judgement and commutation of sentence. (Para 56) |
JUDGMENT :
RITU BAHRI, C.J.
1. A reference has been sent by the IV Additional Sessions Judge, Haridwar, in S.T. No. 14 of 2017, State Vs Sartaj, passed vide judgment and order dated 29.11.2018, whereby the respondent Sartaj has been convicted for the offences punishable under Section 302 , 307 of IPC. He has been further convicted for the offence under Section 4 /25 of ARMS ACT , in S.T. No. 15 of 2017. The convict/respondent was sentenced to death along with a fine of Rs.40,000/- in respect of offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, and he was further sentenced to undergo imprisonment for
The court ruled that while death penalty can be imposed, it should be reserved for exceptional circumstances; in this case, the intent was not premeditated, thereby commuting the death sentence to li....
Capital punishment can only be imposed in 'rarest of rare' cases, and mitigating factors such as the age of the offender can influence commutation of death sentences.
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.
The court ruled that corroborative evidence is essential in murder cases, especially when convicting based on eyewitness testimony.
The court redefined the appropriateness of the death penalty in light of mitigating factors, emphasizing the need to consider a defendant's mental state and family circumstances.
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....
(1) Death sentence – Rarest of Rare Case – Death penalty for offence of murder would not be a violation of constitutional provisions – In grave cases of extreme culpability, capital punishment can be....
The court held that even if bodies are touched, it amounts to penetrative sexual assault under POCSO when the victim is under twelve, establishing strong grounds for conviction.
The court ruled that the death penalty is an exception, emphasizing the need for considering the possibility of reformation and rehabilitation of the accused, leading to a modification of the sentenc....
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....
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
