Summary
Convictions for sexual assault, murder and destruction of evidence concerning two children were upheld. The majority confirmed the death sentence, finding the corroborated judicial confession and circumstantial evidence sufficient and the calculated killings within the rarest-of-rare category. Khanna J agreed on guilt but dissented on sentence, favouring imprisonment for natural life without statutory remission in light of the voluntary confession and other mitigating circumstances.
Issues
- Whether the judicial confession and surrounding evidence established the appellant’s guilt.
- Whether the death sentence should be confirmed or replaced by imprisonment for natural life.
Held
- The majority accepted the corroborated confession as voluntary: the Magistrate repeatedly checked voluntariness, allowed reflection and recorded it after police custody had ended. The much later partial retraction sought to remove the appellant’s own culpability while retaining other details and was rejected. (¶¶ Nariman J: 6, Nariman J: 10–12)
- Medical and DNA evidence corroborated sexual assault. Multiple witnesses and admitted portions of the confession established the appellant’s presence with the children even if a disputed last-seen account was excluded. Absence of semen or blood on a body recovered from flowing water did not undermine the proof. (¶ Nariman J: 7–16)
- The majority held that poisoning followed by deliberate drowning of the two defenceless children to conceal the offences was calculated and exceptionally grave. The asserted youth, rural background and lack of prior convictions did not outweigh the aggravating circumstances; the selectively retracted confession did not establish remorse on these facts. (¶¶ Nariman J: 17–22, Nariman J: 25)
- Dissenting on punishment, Khanna J stressed that death requires both exceptional gravity and foreclosure of the alternative sentence after full consideration of the offender’s circumstances. Natural-life imprisonment without statutory remission remained an available alternative, subject to constitutional clemency. (¶ Khanna J: 1–20)
- Khanna J reserved judgment about the precise location and classification of the recovered hair, but still found guilt proved, relying also on the voluntary judicial confession. He treated that confession as mitigating despite its later partial retraction and considered the appellant’s youth, poverty, first-offender status and lack of involvement in the initial abduction. (¶ Khanna J: 22–40)
Result
Convictions upheld; appeals dismissed by the majority, confirming the death sentence. Khanna J dissented only on punishment and would have substituted imprisonment for the remainder of natural life without remission or commutation under sections 432–433 CrPC.