Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
H.L. DATTU, CJI., S.A. BOBDE, ARUN MISHRA, JJ.
Shabnam – Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondents
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. OF 2015 (@ S.L.P. (Crl.) Nos.6520-6521 of 2013)
W I T H
Saleem – Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondents
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. OF 2015(@ S.L.P. (Crl.) Nos. 6528-6529 of 2013)
Decided On : 15-05-2015
(1973) 1 SCC 20; (1980) 2 SCC 684; (1983) 3 SCC 470; (2012) 4 SCC 257; (2014) 7 SCC 443 – Relied upon
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 – Sentencing – Court has to maintain a link between contemporary community values and the penal system – One of the appellants committing patricide with the help of the other appellant – Eliminating her own entire family including a ten months old infant – Wanting to ensure her alliance with the other accused and grab the family property – Opposed to all community values – Capital sentence is proper. (Para 28, 30)
(2015) 1 SCC 67; (2007) 3 SCC 1; (2011) 14 SCC 401 – Relied upon
(2010) 9 SCC 1; (2009) 12 Scale 580; (2005) 4 SCC 165; (2003) 8 SCC 224; (2001) 3 SCC 673 – Referred
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 – Death sentence – Justifiability – Appellants-accused lovers – Their alliance opposed by family – Accused daughter of deceased head of family, pregnant and expecting child of the other accused – Mixing sedative in tea – Thereafter slitting throats of all the seven deceased including ten months old infant – Daughter feigning unconsciousness and her lover attempting to destroy evidence – Appellants initially pleading not guilty – When cornered trying to throw the blame on the other – Not deserving any leniency. (Para 31)
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 – Death sentence – Justifiability – Aggravating circumstances indicating the extreme brutal, calculated and diabolical nature of the crime – Murdering seven persons including ten months infant – Suggesting little likelihood of reform of the accused – Mitigating circumstance include only young age – Not relevant. (Para 32, 33, 34)
(2015) 1 SCC 67 – Relied upon
Facts of the case:
On the intervening night of 14/15.04.2008, eight persons of the family were present at the residence of Master Shaukat Ali (deceased father), besides himself; his wife Smt. Hashmi (deceased mother), their daughter Shabnam (the appellant-accused), their younger son Rashid (deceased younger brother), their minor niece Rabia (deceased cousin), their elder son Aneesh Ahmad and his wife Anjum (deceased couple) along with their 10 month old son Arsh. At about 02:15 A.M. on the fateful night, upon hearing the cries of appellant-accused Shabnam, their neighbor Lateef Ullah Khan (PW-1) along with other neighbours reached the house. PW-1 entered the house and found Shabnam lying unconscious near the dead body of her deceased father, whose neck was cut and also discovered the dead body of deceased younger brother with slit throat. Further, in another room, PW-1 discovered the dead bodies of the deceased wife, deceased couple and deceased cousin lying in a pool of blood, with their respective necks cut. The dead body of 10 month-old infant, Arsh, was also found between the dead bodies of his parents.
The accused persons were involved in a love affair and an illicit physical relationship. While appellant-accused Shabnam is the educated daughter of the deceased family, working as a Shikshamitra (teacher), the appellant-accused Saleem is an unemployed youth residing in the same village. It is established that the appellant-accused Shabnam was pregnant at the time of commission of the instant gruesome murders. The prosecution has put forth the motive for commission of the offence to eliminate the appellant-accused Shabnam’s family who were vehemently opposed to their relationship and secure the entire property of the family creating financial security for themselves.
The trial court convicted the appellants for offence under Sections 302 read with 34 of the IPC and sentenced them to death.
The High Court confirmed the conviction and the sentence.
Finding of the Court:
Conviction and sentence is proper.
Result: Appeal dismissed.
JUDGMENT
H.L. DATTU, CJI.
1. Leave granted in all the Special Leave Petitions.
2. These appeals are directed against the common judgment and order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in the two connected appeals-Capital Cases Nos. 5003 and 5245 of 2010 along with Capital Reference No. 8 of 2010, dated 26.04.2013. By the impugned judgment and order, the High Court has confirmed the judgment of conviction, dated 14.07.2010 and order of sentence, dated 15.07.2010, passed by the learned Sessions Judge in Sessions Trial No. 293 of 2008, whereby and whereunder the learned Sessions Judge has convicted the appellants-accused for offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “the IPC”) and sentenced them to death.
3. At the outset, it would be pertinent to notice that learned amicus curiae, Shri Dushyant Parashar, appearing for the two appellants-accused has limited his submissions only to the question of sentence. Therefore, the scope of these appeals stand restricted to the determination of appropriate sentence for the offence committed by the appellants-accused.
Facts:
4. The prosecution case in a nutshell is: on the intervening night of 14/15.04.2008, eight persons of the family were present at the residence of Master Shaukat Ali (deceased father), besides himself; his wife Smt. Hashmi (deceased mother), their daughter Shabnam (the appellant-accused), their younger son Rashid (deceased younger brother), their minor niece Rabia (deceased cousin), their elder son Aneesh Ahmad and his wife Anjum (deceased couple) along with their 10 month old son Arsh. At about 02:15 A.M. on the fateful night, upon hearing the cries of appellant-accused Shabnam, their neighbor Lateef Ullah Khan (PW-1) along with other neighbours reached the house. PW-1 entered the house and found Shabnam lying unconscious near the dead body of her deceased father, whose neck was cut and also discovered the dead body of deceased younger brother with slit throat. Further, in another room, PW-1 discovered the dead bodies of the deceased wife, deceased couple and deceased cousin lying in a pool of blood, with their respective necks cut. The dead body of 10 month-old infant, Arsh, was also found between the dead bodies of his parents. Immediately thereafter, PW-1 raised an alarm gathering the neighbours and informed the investigating authorities of the incident. Accordingly, Case Crime No. 880 of 2008 was recorded on the basis of information received from PW-1, and an FIR was registered under Section 302 of the IPC against unknown persons for the murder of seven members of the family, in Police Station Hasanpur at 03:05 A.M. on 15.04.2008. Neither PW-1 nor Hashmat Hussain (PW-2), i.e. the neighbour residing opposite to the house of the deceased persons, had conversed with the appellant-accused Shabnam before approaching the investigative authorities.
5. The investigative agency reached the spot, prepared the inquest report and dispatched the dead bodies for post-mortem. Further, blood-stained pillows, mattress, quilt, rope of cot, etc. found near the respective dead bodies were duly sealed, marked, taken into possession and sent for further analysis to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Moradabad (for short, “the FSL”). Dr. Deewan Ram (PW-24) conducted the post-mortem on the dead bodies of diseased father, infant and the younger brother and Dr. R.P. Sharma (PW-27) conducted the post-mortem on the remaining deceased persons. Upon further investigation, both the appellants-accused, namely Saleem and Shabnam, were arrested. Recoveries of the murder weapon-axe and a blood-stained shirt were made at the instance of Saleem. Further, a Nokia mobile phone, one empty wrapper of 10 bio-pose tablets, blood stained cloths, mobile SIM of Saleem, etc. were recovered from Shabnam’s possession. Additionally, the call records and details for conversations between the appellants-accused were also obtained.
6. It is the case of the prosecutio
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
