Summary
The Supreme Court upheld convictions for kidnapping and murdering three children on a complete chain of circumstantial evidence, but commuted death to imprisonment for life with no remission before twenty-five years. Same-day sentencing did not invalidate the sentence where a real and effective separate opportunity had been afforded. Commutation rested on the cumulative mitigating circumstances, especially emotional disturbance, youth, absence of antecedents and good prison conduct.
Issues
- Whether the circumstantial evidence proved kidnapping and murder beyond reasonable doubt.
- Whether sentencing on the conviction date necessarily violated the opportunity of hearing.
- Whether the balance of aggravation and mitigation warranted death.
Held
- Last-seen evidence, recovery of the bodies at the accused’s instance, motive, absence from home and village, telephone evidence and the homicidal deaths formed a complete chain establishing guilt. The discrepancies identified were not material enough to undermine the prosecution case. (¶¶ 14, 15, 16, 17, 17.1, 18, 19, 19.1, 20, 21, 22)
- The omission of a specific question about one last-seen witness was not fatal on these facts: his deposition had been referred to during examination of the accused, and another independent witness established the same circumstance. Supported portions of a hostile witness’s testimony remained usable. (¶¶ 17, 20)
- Non-examination of a mobile-company officer was not fatal here, where the call records had been exhibited through the investigating officer without defence objection and seizure evidence linked the SIM to the accused. This was a case-specific evaluation of the evidence. (¶ 19.1)
- The controlling sentencing requirement was a real and effective opportunity to present relevant material and submissions. Sentencing on the day of conviction did not by itself vitiate the process; the trial court separately heard the accused and considered aggravating and mitigating circumstances. (¶¶ 23, 23.1, 23.2, 23.3, 24)
- The sentencing balance had to account for the offender as well as the crime. Extreme emotional disturbance, age twenty-eight at the offence, no antecedents, good prison conduct, poverty and family circumstances cumulatively warranted commutation despite the brutal killing of three children. (¶¶ 25, 25.1, 25.2, 25.3, 25.4, 25.5, 25.6)
- Life imprisonment was expressly to last until the end of the accused’s life, with no remission until completion of twenty-five years of imprisonment. (¶ 26)
Result
Appeal partly allowed. Convictions under sections 302 and 364 IPC confirmed; death sentence commuted to imprisonment for life, with no remission before twenty-five years of imprisonment.