Back
2016 Supreme(MP) 1143
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
S. C. Sharma, Ved Prakash Sharma, JJ.
State Of M. P. – Petitioner
Versus
Kailash S/O Madanlala Malviya – Respondent
Cri. Ref. No. 2 of 2016 and Cr. A. No. 996 of 2016
Decided On : 20-10-2016
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Gopal Hardia
For the Respondent: Milind Phadke
The judgment emphasizes the reliance on circumstantial evidence, the 'Panchsheel' guidelines, and the legal principles for imposing the death penalty, highlighting the absence of mitigating circumstances.
Headnote:
Criminal Procedure - Death Sentence - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sections 366 - Indian Penal Code - Sections 302, 382, 397
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for the murder of Chandrakanta and robbing her of valuable ornaments. The prosecution's case was based on circumstantial evidence, as there were no eyewitnesses to the incident. The appellant denied the charges and claimed innocence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the appellant guilty based on circumstantial evidence, including his apprehension near the crime scene, recovery of the victim's ornaments from him, and DNA evidence linking him to the crime. The court also considered the brutality of the crime and the absence of mitigating circumstances.
Issues: The issues before the court were whether the conviction was sustainable based on circumstantial evidence and whether the death sentence was justified in the absence of mitigating circumstances.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the principles of circumstantial evidence and the 'Panchsheel' guidelines to establish the guilt of the appellant. The court also considered the legal principles for imposing the death penalty, emphasizing the absence of mitigating circumstances.
Final Decision: The court affirmed the appellant's conviction and modified the death sentence to life imprisonment, considering the absence of aggravating circumstances and the appellant's potential for reform.
ORDER :
Ved Prakash Sharma, J.
The Reference made under section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘the Code’) by IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain for confirmation of death sentence imposed against Kailash – the appellant, on his conviction for offence under sections 302 and 382 of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’), vide judgment dated 4-5-2016 rendered in S.T. No. 18/2016 and Criminal Appeal No. 996/2016 preferred by the convict against the same judgment challenging conviction and sentence have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. The appellant in his examination under section 313 of ‘the Code’ has not disputed that Sadanand Dikshit (P.W.1), Madanlal Pawar (P.W.2), Devi Singh (P.W.3) and Ruwab Khan (P.W.5), all residents of Saraswati Colony, Tarana, Distt. Ujjain, knew the appellant as well as Chandrakanta (deceased) since before the date of alleged occurrence dated i.e. 27-10-2015. It has further not been disputed that appellant was arrested vide Ex.P/3 on 28-10-2015 in post-midnight hours.
3. The prosecution story, as unfolded before the learned trial Court, briefly stated, is that on 27-10-2015 around 7.15 p.m., Devi Singh (P.W.3), the next door neighbour of Babulal, resident of Saraswati Colony, Tarana, Distt. Ujjain heard cries coming out from the house of Babulal. He told his neighbour Sadanand (P.W.1) and other persons of the locality in this regard. Thereupon, Sadanand (P.W.1), Madanlal Pawar (P.W.2), Ruwab Khan (P.W.5), Deepak Limidiya (P.W.6), Jagdeesh (P.W.8), Deepak Patidar (P.W.9), Rajesh Kharetiya (P.W.10), Sumit Dikshit (P.W.11), all neighbours of Babulal, reached near his house and found it bolted from inside. The door of the house was then bolted from outside also by then so as to prevent apprehended escape of the assailant(s) from the house. In the meantime, the appellant, who was inside the house, jumped out from the rear window of the house and ran away towards the agricultural fields. However, he was chased by Sadanand (P.W.1), Jagdeesh (P.W.8), Rajesh Kharetiya (P.W.10) and Sumit Dikshit (P.W.11) and was ultimately apprehended some 300-400 meters away near the agricultural field and brought back near the house of Babulal. By this time, Devi Singh (P.W.3) had already proceeded to Police Station-Tarana, situated some 2 kilometers away from the place of occurrence. On reaching the police station, he found that police officials have already proceeded to the spot. The door of Babulal’s house, which was bolted from inside, was broke open by Kulwant Joshi (P.W.18), the then Station House Officer, Police Station Tarana, who by that time had reached there. He found the body of Chandrakanta inside the house lying in the pool of blood in a seriously injured condition. She was immediately rushed to Civil Hospital, Tarana, however, was declared brought dead by the doctors. Around 12 mid night, First Information Report (Ex.P/1) and merg report (Ex.P/6) was registered regarding this incident at Police Station Tarana. The appellant being already in police custody, was arrested vide memo Ex.P/3.
4. On being searched by Kulwant Joshi (P.W.20), a pair of silver ‘Payajab’, a pair of golden tops, a mobile phone, driving licence of appellant along with his bloodstained ‘Banyan’ Pant and ‘Kurta’ were seized from the appellant, vide seizure memo Ex.P/4.
5. Next day on 28-10-2015, the inquest proceedings were held by Kulwant Joshi (P.W.18) on the dead body and vide inquest report (Ex.P/6), it was found that Chandrakanta died because of multiple injuries on her head and chest. The dead body was sent for post-mortem examination. On 28-10-2015, a team of three doctors headed by Dr. Deepak Pipal (P.W.12) conducted autopsy on the dead body in Civil Hospital, Tarana and vide post-mortem report (Ex.P/12) found following 15 ante-mortem injuries including 4 stab wounds, 5 incised wounds and 6 lacerated wounds on the person of the deceased :
i. Stab wound at the left side of chest
