Summary
Trusted employees of an elderly couple, a retired Major General and his wife, murdered them for money while they slept, battering their faces beyond recognition with a hammer and a tava. The trial court sentenced the two convicts to death. The High Court commuted the sentence to life imprisonment. In the appeals by the State and the complainant, the complainant did not press for death but sought a fixed term. The convicts had also tried to escape from prison by digging a tunnel. The Supreme Court, applying Sriharan, held that the High Court or the Supreme Court may impose a fixed-term sentence without remission instead of death. The pre-planned killing, the betrayal of trust and the brutality called for more than ordinary life imprisonment, while the convicts' young age was the only mitigating factor. The Court imposed a fixed term of 30 years.
Issues
- Whether, where death is not imposed for a brutal double murder, the Supreme Court should impose a fixed-term sentence without remission instead of ordinary life imprisonment under Section 302 IPC
Provisions considered
- Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860For murder the choice is death or life, but under Sriharan the High Court or the Supreme Court, though not the trial court, may impose life with a fixed minimum term before remission. A 30-year fixed term was imposed. (¶¶ 3, 12)
Held
- Once the conviction is under Section 302 IPC, the sentence is death or life imprisonment. A third option, available only to the High Court or the Supreme Court and not the trial court, is a sentence requiring the convict to serve a fixed term before being considered for remission (Union of India v. Sriharan). (¶ 3)
- The murder was pre-planned for gain by persons in a position of trust with an aged couple who depended on them, and it was carried out with brutality on sleeping victims. A wrong signal goes to society if such breaches of trust attract only an ordinary life sentence. The convicts' later attempt to escape from prison was a further aggravating circumstance. (¶¶ 6, 9, 10)
- The only mitigating factor was the convicts' youth (22 and 24 years at the time). Balancing the victims' plea for justice with the possibility of reformation (Shankar Kishanrao Khade), a fixed term of 30 years was appropriate. (¶¶ 8, 11, 12, 13)
Result
Appeals partly allowed. Instead of ordinary life imprisonment, the convicts were sentenced to a fixed term of 30 years before which they are not to be considered for remission; parties to bear their own costs.