2011 Supreme(SC) 902

2011 (6) Supreme 289
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Markandey Katju and Chandramauli Kr. Prasad,JJ.
Ajitsingh Harnamsingh Gujral — Appellant
versus
State of Maharashtra — Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1969 of 2009
Decided on : 13-9-2011

IMPORTANT POINTS
1. It is true that motive is important in cases of circumstantial evidence, but that does not mean that in all cases of circumstantial evidence if the prosecution has been unable to satisfactorily prove a motive its case must fail.
2. In cases of circumstantial evidence the settled law is that the prosecution must establish the entire chain of circumstances which connects the accused to the crime.
3. The last seen theory comes into play where the time gap between the point of time when the accused and deceased were last seen alive and when the deceased is found dead is so small that the possibility of any person other than the accused being the author of the crime becomes impossible.
4. In determining the culpability of an accused and the final decision as to the nature of sentence, a balance sheet of the aggravating and mitigating circumstances vis-a-vis the accused has to be drawn up and in doing so the mitigating circumstances have to be given full weight so that all factors are considered before the option is exercised.
5. Accused deserves death penalty where the murder was grotesque, diabolical, revolting or of a dastardly manner so as to arouse intense and extreme indignation of the community, and when the collective conscience of the community is petrified, or outraged.
6. Honour killing , Hired killing ,fake encounter by the police and dowry death comes within the category of ‘rarest of rare cases’.

Headnote:Indian Penal Code,1860-Section 302-Death by burn injuries-Prosecution of appellant for causing death of four of his family members by pouring petrol on them and setting them on fire-Conviction by Trial Court-Appeal-Dismissed by High Court-Appeal- Deposition of PW3 and PW5 that appellant was a dictatorial personality, who wanted to dominate over his family and was also hot tempered- Accused was last seen with the deceased- Evidence of PW16 that at about midnight when he was in the veranda in front of the flat of the accused he heard loud sound of quarrels from the flat of accused between accused and his wife-This witness also stated that on date of occurrence at midnight. he heard a big sound in the building and saw fire in the flat of the accused- This witness identified the 4 dead bodies inside the flat of the accused- There was a time gap of only about 4 hours from the time when appellant was seen with his wife (deceased) and the time of the incident-Thus he was last seen with his wife and there was only a short interval between this and the fire- Another link in the chain of circumstances connecting accused with the crime was his sudden disappearance from the scene after the incident-Finding of High Court that plea of alibi was totally false and bogus held justified- Finding of the 10 litre can with some petrol in it clearly showed that petrol, sufficient in quantity to burn and kill all the four persons, was brought by the accused- Prosecution had been able to establish entire chain of circumstances which connected accused to the crime –Impugned judgment of High Court called for no interference-Appeal dismissed. (Paras 29 to 49)

        Death Sentence- Prosecution of appellant for causing death of four of his family members by pouring petrol on them and setting them on fire-Conviction by Trial Court-Appeal-Dismissed by High Court –Appeal- Accused deserves death penalty where the murder was grotesque, diabolical, revolting or of a dastardly manner so as to arouse intense and extreme indignation of the community, and when the collective conscience of the community is petrified, or outraged-A person like the appellant who instead of doing his duty of protecting his family kills them in such a cruel and barbaric manner cannot be reformed or rehabilitated- The balance sheet was heavily against him - In the instant case the accused did not act on any spur of moment provocation- It is no doubt that a quarrel occurred between him and his wife at midnight, but the fact that he had brought a large quantity of petrol into his residential apartment showed that he had pre-planned the diabolical and gruesome murder in a dastardly manner- Burning living persons to death is a horrible act which causes excruciating pain to the victim, and this could not have been unknown to the appellant- Death sentence awarded to appellant hence upheld- Appeal dismissed. (Paras 95 to 102)

       Facts of the Case :

        Appellant herein in the instant case was prosecuted for causing death of four of his family members by pouring petrol on them and setting them on fire. Trial Court convicted appellant and awarded death sentence. Appeal thereagainst was Dismissed by High Court.

        2. Present appeal has been filed against said order of High Court.

       Findings of the Court :

        Deposition of PW3 and PW5 that appellant was a dictatorial personality, who wanted to dominate over his family and was also hot tempered. He would even beat his deceased with a leather belt. Accused was last seen with the deceased. Evidence of PW16 that at about midnight when he was in the veranda in front of the flat of the accused he heard loud sound of quarrels from the flat of accused between accused and his wife.This witness also stated that on date of occurrence at midnight. he heard a big sound in the building and saw fire in the flat of the accused. Fire brigade came and extinguished the fire. This witness identified the 4 dead bodies inside the flat of the accused. Evidences of PW3, PW4 and PW 5, , thus fully established that appellant was last seen with his wife at about midnight and was in fact quarreling with her at that time. There was a time gap of only about 4 hours from the time when appellant was seen with his wife (deceased) and the time of the incident. Thus he was last seen with his wife and there was only a short interval between this and the fire. Another link in the chain of circumstances connecting accused with the crime was his sudden disappearance from the scene after the incident. Finding of High Court that plea of alibi was totally false and bogus held justified. Finding of the 10 litre can with some petrol in it clearly showed that petrol, sufficient in quantity to burn and kill all the four persons, was brought by the accused. Prosecution had been able to establish entire chain of circumstances which connected accused to the crime .Impugned judgment of High Court called for no interference. Appeal was dismissed.