2003 Supreme(SC) 1023

2003(7) Supreme 478
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Karnataka High Court)
N. Santosh Hegde and B.P. Singh, JJ.
Praveen Kumar -Appellant
versus
State of Karnataka -Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 254 of 2003
Decided on 15-10-2003
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant : R.S. Lambat, Advocate (A.C).
For the Respondent : Sanjay R. Hegde, Advocate.

IMPORTANT POINT
Fact of ornaments belonging to victim being in possession of appellant immediately after murder would lead to an inference in absence of any explanation that appellant must have robbed those jewelleries from victim and in that process committed murder of victims.

Headnote:(i) Indian Penal Code, 1860-Sections 302 and 392 r/w 397-Appellant was son of brother of one of the deceased-Murder of four members of family of victim and removal of cash and jewellery-Conviction of appellant based on circumstantial evidence by trial Court and confirmed in appeal by High Court-Appeal-Prosecution established that appellant, a tailor by profession, was in debt-Ornaments belonging to victim were recovered from constructive possession of appellant immediately after murder led to inference that appellant must have robbed those jewelleries and in that process committed murder of victims-Identity of recovered jewelleries was established by witnesses-No requirement of law that disclosure statement u/s 27 of Evidence Act should always be made in presence of independent witnesses-Recoveries got effected by appellant were in presence of independent witnesses-Recoveries effected next day of making of statement would not affect prosecution case-Appellant was seen in the locality where victim were residing in the night of incident and no explanation by appellant for that presence-Finger prints taken from place of occurrence tallied with that of appellant-Conviction was liable to be upheld. (Paras 13 to 26)

       (ii) Indian Penal Code, 1860-Sections 302, 392 and r/w 397-Death sentence-Appellant committed murder of sister of the father and her three other family members including a child-Victim had accommodated appellant in her house despite her large family and crime was committed only for greed-Appellant once absconded from judicial custody during trial for 4 years which indicated that possibility of any rehabilitation was nil-Death sentence awarded by trial Court and confirmed by High Court was befitting the facts.

       Held : As noticed by the courts below, so far as the factors to be taken note of while awarding the extreme penalty of death are concerned, it is settled by various judgments of this Court, reference to which has already been made by the two courts below in their judgments. We have independently considered the facts of the case and find no reason whatsoever to differ from the view taken by the two courts below even in regard to the quantum and nature of sentence. The appellant was a middle-aged person at the time of the crime and should be attributed with sufficient knowledge of the consequences of his act. The act in question cannot be construed as an act of revenge or arising out of a situation wherein the appellant was constrained to commit murders. Hardly 3 years before the incident in question, Appi the aunt of the appellant had accommodated him in her house despite her large family and gave him an opportunity in life to make an honest living as a tailor. He left the house of Appi not out of any misunderstanding or disappointment but because of his marriage and shifted his residence to his parent village of Uppinangadi wherefrom also he moved out to Mangalore to eke out his living as a tailor. The appellant has only himself to blame for his financial losses which was as could be seen from the records, due to his addiction to alcohol as also his gambling habits and it is because of this he had to incur loans and as alleged by the prosecution it is for satisfying his addiction, he planned to rob the family of the victims even at the cost of their lives. In the process he did not even bother to spare the life of a young child. As noted by the trial court the conduct of his in absconding from judicial custody for nearly 4 years, also indicates the fact that the possibility of any rehabilitation is nil. The act of murder of 4 innocent sleeping victims without any provocation whatsoever from the victims side indicates cold-blooded, pre-meditated approach of the appellant to attain his goals, however illegal the same may be. In such circumstances we are in agreement with the courts below that the only sentence that would befit the facts of this case is that of extreme penalty of death which was rightly imposed by the trial court after due consideration and affirmed by the High Court also after independent consideration of the entire facts of the case. (Para 29)