Back
RITU BAHRI, ALOK KUMAR VERMA
In the matter of capital punishment awarded to Harswroop – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of facts leading to the conviction. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. discussion on the evidence of sexual offences under pocso. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 3. court's assessment of circumstantial evidence. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37) |
JUDGMENT :
Ritu Bahri, C.J.
The present Reference has been sent by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge / FTC / Special Judge (POCSO), Udham Singh Nagar, under Section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for affirmation of the sentence of death awarded by said court against the convict Harswroop under Section 302 IPC. Aforesaid convict has been further convicted under Section 364 IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and also directed to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/-. He was also convicted under Section 201 IPC, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of six years and directed to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/-. The convict was further sentenced under Section 6 of the POCO Act, and sentenced to imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs.10,000/-. Convicts Pappu and Roopwati were, however, acquitted of the charge of offence punishable under Section 16 /17 POCSO Act. Convict Pappu a
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.
Life sentence is rule and death sentence is an exception.
The imposition of the death penalty requires the statutory provision of special reasons, and a balancing of aggravating and mitigating circumstances must be conducted.
(1) Evidence is only to be weighed and not to be counted – It is essentially, for prosecution to decide as to how many witnesses are to be examined to establish its case on any particular point.(2) D....
Circumstantial evidence, particularly the 'last seen' principle, can suffice for conviction in rape and murder cases yet demands rigorous scrutiny for reliability.
(1) Minor contradictions do not go to root of matter and destroy whole prosecution which is firmly made out against accused.(2) Protection guaranteed under Article 20(3) of Constitution of India does....
The court ruled that the death penalty is not warranted in this case, emphasizing the need for a balance between aggravating and mitigating circumstances, ultimately commuting the sentence to 30 year....
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....
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
