All India Reporter

AIR 1999 SUPREME COURT 1332

SUPREME COURT
(From : Punjab and Haryana)*
K. T. THOMAS , J. and M. B. SHAH , J.

Criminal Appeal No. 224 of 1999 (arising out of S.L.P. (Cri.) No. 176 of 1998), D/- 22 - 2 - 1999

Om Prakash Appellant v. State of Haryana Respondent.

Penal Code (45 of 1860), S.302 - Death sentence - Rarest of rare case - Determination - Court
has to balance aggravating and mitigating circumstances - Accused a member of Para-Military
Force, killing seven members of a family in pre-planned manner - He was 23 years old at that
time and having no previous criminal record - Accused and his family members suffering agony
at hands of family of victims - He having a cause to feel

@page-SC1333
aggrieved for injustice meted out to his family members - Not rarest of the rare case - Death
sentence reduced to life imprisonment.

In the instant case the question would be whether the case of the accused could be one of the "rarest
of the rare" cases so that death sentence is required to be imposed. Even though this is a gruesome
act on the part of the accused in killing seven members of a family in pre-planned manner yet it is
a result of human mind going astray because of constant harassment of the family members of the
accused. It could be termed as a case of retribution or act for taking revenge. No doubt, it would
not be a justifiable act at all, but the accused was feeling morally justifiable on his part. Hence, it
would be difficult to term it as the "rarest of the rare" cases. Further, this is not a crime committed
because of lust for wealth or women, that is to say, murders are neither for money such as extortion,
dacoity or robbery; nor even for lust and rape; it is not an act of anti-social element, kidnapping and
trafficking in minor girls or of an anti-social element dealing in dangerous drugs which affects the
entire moral fibre of the society and kills number of persons; nor is it crime committed for power or
political ambitions or part of organised criminal activities. It is a crime committed by the accused who
had a cause to feel aggrieved for injustice meted out to his family members at the hands of the family
of the other party who according to him were strong enough physically as well as economically and
having influence with the authority which was required to protect him and his family. The bitterness
increased to a boiling point and because of the agony suffered by him and his family members at
the hands of the other party and for not getting protection from the police officers concerned or total
inaction despite repeated written prayers goaded or compelled the accused to take law in his own
hands which culminated in gruesome murders; may be that his mind got derailed of the track and
went astray or beyond control because of extreme mental disturbances for the constant harassment
and disputes. Further considering the facts and circumstances, it cannot be said that he would be a
menace to the society; there is no reason to believe that he cannot be reformed or rehabilitated and
that he is likely to continue criminal acts of violence as would constitute a continuing threat to the
society. He was working in B.S.F. as a disciplined member of the Armed Forces aged about 23 at
the relevant time, having no criminal antecedents. In the result, this case cannot be treated as one of
the rarest of rare cases where lesser sentence of imprisonment of life would not at all be adequate.

Registered To : Principal 1
© Copyright with AIR Infotech, All India Reporter. All rights reserved
 All India Reporter

Hence, the sentence of death penalty was altered by awarding the sentence of imprisonment for life
to the accused.
(Paras14 15 16 17 18)

Cases Referred Chronological Paras

1996 AIR SCW 4166 : 1996 SCC (Cri) 1314 : AIR 1997 SC 7
18 : 1997 Cri LJ 51
1995 AIR SCW 2793 : (1995) 4 SCC 262 7
1994 AIR SCW 2083 : (1994) 4 SCC 478 : 1994 Cri LJ 3071 8
AIR 1980 SC 898 : (1980) 2 SCC 684 : 1980 Cri LJ 636 9

Rakesh Diwedi, Sr. Advocate, Ms. V. Mohana, Advocate (A.C.), Vinay Garg, Vikas Bansal,
Advocates with him, for Appellant; Mahabir Singh, Advocate, for Respondent/Complainant B.S.
Chahar, Ms. Jyoti Chahar and Prem Malhotra, Advocates, for the State.

* M.R. No. 3 of 1997, D/- 23-9-1997 (Punj and Har.)

Judgement

1. SHAH, J. :-Leave granted.

2. At the time of admission of this matter, the Court had issued notice limited to the question of
sentence only. Hence the question involved in this appeal is whether death sentence imposed requires
to be confirmed on the ground that it is the rarest of the rare cases? Whether sentence of imprisonment
for life would be inadequate? This is a case in which persistent disputes over a small house in a village
between two neighbours and inaction by the authority (despite repeated prayers), led to this case of
gruesome murders of seven persons, some totally innocent.

3. Before dealing with the contentions raised by the learned Counsel for the appellant, we would first
refer to a few facts. It is a prosecution version that on 28th January, 1990 (28th June, 1990), Chater
Singh (PW-4) along with his wife deceased-Smt. Daya Kaur was sleeping at his house and his brother
Satbir, his wife Smt. Kamlesh and mother Smt. Khazani (deceased) were sleeping at the house of
Satbir while inside the house of Satbir, Satbir and two male progeny of Chater Singh, Aman Kumar
and Mohinder and one male progeny Surender of Hawa Singh (PW-5) were sleeping. Around 4.00
a.m., Chater

@page-SC1334

Singh saw torch light emanating from the window of his house, upon which he and his wife got up
from their cots and saw Parma Nand accused holding a torch in his hand and Ajit Singh accused (since
dead) standing by his side holding a gun. Ajit Singh fired a shot from his gun, which hit the breast of
Smt. Daya Kaur who fell down and met her doom. He raised an alarm, whereafter Ajit Singh-accused
entered his house from the rear door and fired at Chater Singh from his gun which hit the fingers of
his right hand. Chater Singh caught hold the barrel of the gun but Ajit Singh got it freed and handed
over his weapon to Om Prakash-accused present in the courtyard of the house. It is stated that one
other person not known to Chater Singh was also present in the street. Thereafter all the four reached

Registered To : Principal 2
© Copyright with AIR Infotech, All India Reporter. All rights reserved
 All India Reporter

the house of Satbir followed by Chater Singh and Hawa Singh and there accused Om Prakash fired
from his gun hitting Smt. Kamlesh, wife of Satbir and Smt. Khazani who succumbed to the injuries.
Thereafter, the assailants headed towards the house of Satbir where Chater Singh and Hawa Singh had
already reached. At that place, Om Prakash fired indiscriminately from the gun and shot dead Satbir,
Mohinder, Aman Kumar male progeny of Chater Singh and Surender son of Hawa Singh (PW-5). It
is stated that after committing the gruesome murder of 7 persons accused-Parma Nand made out that
they had taken the revenge regarding the plot in dispute and dared anybody to confront them at the
risk of elimination. All the accused thereafter fled away with their weapon of offence. After departure
of the accused, many persons collected. Leaving Hawa Singh at the spot, Chater Singh rushed to
the Police Station, Sampla and lodged FIR at Ex. PJ at 7.30 a.m. During investigation, weapon of
offence, that is, S.L.R. (self loading rifle) which the accused Om Prakash surrendered with the BSF
authorities, where he remained posted, was collected and was sent to the Bureau, Forensic Science
Lab., Madhuban along with empties and bullets lifted from the scene of occurrence. After completion
of the investigation, accused were charge-sheeted for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 307
read with Section 34 of I.P.C. Prior to trial, accused Ajit Singh had expired. In Sessions Case No.
341/90, the learned Sessions Judge, Rohtak by Judgment and Order dated 29th March, 1997, convicted
the accused Om Prakash and Parma Nand under Sections 302/307/452/506 read with Section 34,
I.P.C. and under Section 25 of the Arms Act after appreciating the evidence in detail.

4. The learned Sessions Judge observed that mitigating circumstances culled out by the learned
Defence Counsel cannot save the convict Om Prakash from the gallows, in case, the order of sentence
is confirmed by the High Court because on that ill-fated morning of 28-6-1990, around 4.00 a.m.,
the bullets clawed through the aged (Khazani, 77 years) and middle aged (Daya Kaur, 40 years), the
young (Satbir 28-29 years, Kamlesh, 22 years) and the adolescent (Surender 16-17 years) and two
boys below their teens (Aman Kumar and Mohinder aged 9/11-12 years). The attempt was to wipe out
the entire family of Mange Ram, both male and female. Victims were sleeping, defenceless. Firing
was restored to without any provocation to wreck vengeance over the dispute of a plot, which had
been amicably settled with the intervention of relatives and friends, though accused Om Prakash had
not relished the same. The children of Satbir Singh-deceased were rendered orphan because he and
his wife Kamlesh fell to the bullets (one of the survivor was a girl aged about six months). Lot of
deliberations, premeditation and planning had gone in the commission of the crime. It was absolutely
devilish and dastardly. The weapon which was meant to beat back the intruders from the Indian
Territory, was used to wreak personal vendetta. So, in respect of Om Prakash- accused, the case falls
within the category of "rarest of rare cases." With regard to the co-accused Parma Nand, the learned
Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.
2,000/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo R.I. for two years. Conviction and sentence order
is as under:-

Om Prakash Accused Under Section 302, IPC, for Sentenced to death

committing the murder of
Khazani, Kamelesh, Satbir,
Mohinder, Aman Kumar and
Surender

Registered To : Principal 3
© Copyright with AIR Infotech, All India Reporter. All rights reserved
 All India Reporter

Under Section 302/34, IPC, To undergo imprisonment

for the murder of Daya Kaur for life and to pay a fine of
committed by Ajit Singh. Rs 2,000/- and in default of
payment of fine, to undergo R.I.
for two years.
Under Section 307/34, IPC, for To undergo imprisonment
the injuries caused by Ajit Singh for life and to pay a fine of
to Chater Singh with an intention Rs 1,000/- and in default of
to cause his death. payment of fine, to undergo R.I.
for one year.
Under Section 27(3) of the Arms Since the S.L.R. bearing butt
Act, 1959 No 362 and body No. W 7522
is a prohibited Arm and the
prohibited ammunition was
used in causing the murder
of Khazani, Kamlesh, Satbir,
Mohinder, Aman Kumar, and
Surender, accused Om Prakash
is sentenced to death.
Parma Nand Accused Under Section 302/34, IPC for To undergo imprisonment
the murder of Khazani, Kamlesh, for life and to pay a fine of
Satbir, Mohinder, Aman Kumar, Rs 2,000/- and in default of
Surender, and Daya Kaur. payment of fine, to undergo R.I.
for two years.
Under Section 307/34, IPC, for To undergo imprisonment
causing injuries to Chater Singh for life and to pay a fine of
by Ajit Singh. Rs 1,000/- and in default of
payment of fine, to undergo R.I.
for one year.

5. On appeal, after appreciating the entire evidence, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Criminal
Appeal No. 343/DB of 1997 confirmed the conviction of the accused.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that finding given by the High Court while confirming
the death sentence requires to be set aside because the Court has considered only one side of the
picture and has not appreciated the reasons which drove the appellant to this dastardly

@page-SC1335

act. It has been pointed out that High Court has observed that appellant was a member of the Border
Security Force and prior to present occurrence had no serious dispute with the complainant party but
for the matter pertaining to the plot in question has belied the trust that the armed force had put in
him by betraying an utter lack of discipline; the murders were committed with premeditation and in
a thought out manner as would be reflected in the letter Ex. PX and the fact that he had absconded
on 27th June, 1990 from his unit and had returned after having committed the crime. It was a cold-

Registered To : Principal 4
© Copyright with AIR Infotech, All India Reporter. All rights reserved
 All India Reporter

blooded attack on 7 persons of a family, most of them being women and children who had given no
provocation to the accused and had caused him no harm; an attack had been made at the dead of night
while they lay asleep; an attack had been made despite the compromise that had been entered into
between Suraj Bhan, father of the accused and Chater Singh and others; it appeared that murders were
committed with a positive intention of wiping out the families of Chater Singh and Hawa Singh. The
Court after considering the decision rendered in the case of Surja Ram v. State of Rajasthan, 1996
SCC (Cri) 1314 : (1996 AIR SCW 4166), held that the Court must respond to the cry of society and
to settle what would be a deterrent punishment for what was an apparently abominable crime.

7. It is true that Court must respond to the

@page-SC1336

cry of the society and to settle what would be deterrent punishment for abominable crime. It is
equally true that large number of criminals go unpunished thereby increasing criminals in the society
and law-loosing it deterrent effect. It is also truism as observed in the case of State of M.P. v.
Shyamsunder Trivedi, reported in (1995) 4 SCC 262 at p. 273 : (1995 AIR SCW 2793 at Pp.
2800-01), that the exaggerated adherence to and insistence upon the establishment of proof beyond
every reasonable doubt, by the prosecution, ignoring the ground realities, the fact-situation and the
peculiar circumstances of a given case often results in miscarriage of justice and makes the justice
delivery system a suspect; in the ultimate analysis the society suffers and a criminal gets encouraged.
Sometimes it is stated that only rights of the criminals are kept in mind, the victims are forgotten.
Despite this it should be kept in mind that while imposing the rarest of rare punishment, i.e. death
penalty, the Court must balance the mitigating and aggravating circumstances of the crime and it
would depend upon particular and peculiar facts and circumstances of each case.

8. Dealing with this aspect in the case of Shankar v. State of Tamil Nadu (1994) 4 SCC 478 (para
50) : 1994 AIR SCW 2083) (para 45), this Court has observed as under:

"The choice as to which of the two punishments provided for murder is the proper one in a given case
will depend upon the particular circumstances of the case and the Court has to exercise its discretion
judicially and on a well-recognised principles after balancing all the mitigating and aggravating
circumstances of the crime. The Court also should see whether there is something uncommon about
the crime which renders sentence of imprisonment of life inadequate and calls for death sentence. The
nature of the crime and the circumstances of the offender should be so revealing that the criminal is a
menace to the society and the sentence of imprisonment of life would be inadequate. The sentence of
death should be reserved for the rarest of rare cases after a due consideration of both mitigating and
aggravating circumstances. What circumstances bring a particular case under the category of rarest
of rare cases vary from case to case depending upon the nature of the crime, weapons used and the
manner in which it is perpetrated etc."

9. In the aforesaid case, the Court referred to an earlier Full Bench decision of this Court rendered in
the case of Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC 684 : (AIR 1980 SC 898), wherein the
Court after referring to aggravating circumstances (para 202) (of SCC) : (Para 200 of AIR) the Court
held that following mitigating circumstances (para 206) (of SCC) : (para 204 of AIR) are undoubtedly
relevant circumstances and must be given weightage in determination of sentence:-

Registered To : Principal 5
© Copyright with AIR Infotech, All India Reporter. All rights reserved
 All India Reporter

(1) The age of the accused. If the accused is young or old, he shall not be sentenced to death.

(2) The probability that the accused would not commit criminal acts of violence as would constitute
a continuing threat to society.

(3) The probability that the accused can be reformed and rehabilitated.

The State shall by evidence prove that the accused does not satisfy the conditions (3) and (4) above.
(sic)

(4) That in the facts and circumstances of the case the accused believed that he was morally justified
in committing the offence.

(5) That the accused acted under the duress or domination of another person.

(6) That the condition of the accused showed that he was mentally defective and that the said defect
impaired his capacity to appreciate the criminality of his conduct."

The Court further observed (AIR 1980 SC 898 at P. 945):

"There are numerous other circumstances justifying the passing of the lighter sentence; as there are
countervailing circumstances of aggravation. "We cannot obviously feed into a judicial computer all
such situations since they are astrological imponderables in an imperfect and undulating society."
Nonetheless, it cannot be over-emphasised that the scope and concept of mitigating factors in the
area of death penalty must receive a liberal and expansive construction by the Courts in accord with
the sentencing policy writ large in Section 354(3). Judges should never be blood-thirsty. Hanging of
murderers has never been too good for them. Facts and figures, albeit incomplete, furnished by the
Union of India, show that in the past, Courts have inflicted the

@page-SC1337

extreme penalty with extreme infrequency - a fact which attests to the caution and compassion which
they have always brought to bear on the exercise of their sentencing discretion in so grave a matter.
It is, therefore, imperative to voice the concern that Courts, aided by the broad illustrative guidelines
indicated by us, will discharge the onerous function to evermore scrupulous care and humane concern,
directed along the highroad of legislative policy outlined in Section 354 (3) viz., that for (persons
convicted of murder, life imprisonment is the rule and death sentence) an exception."

10. Hence it is settled law that sentence of death should be reserved for rarest of the rare cases where
sentence of imprisonment of life would be inadequate. In each case for finding out whether it is rarest
of the rare cases, the Court has to balance the aggravating and mitigating circumstances. From the
evidence on record, it is apparent that the accused had committed gruesome murders of innocent
persons. There is no doubt that it is premeditated and in a well thought out manner. He was also a
member of Para Military Force. As against this, it is also on record that he has not committed any
offence on any previous occasion. At the relevant time in 1990 when the incident took place, he was 23
years old. In this background, if we refer to the evidence on record produced by the prosecution which

Registered To : Principal 6
© Copyright with AIR Infotech, All India Reporter. All rights reserved
 All India Reporter

is in the form of applications (letters) written by the appellant-accused to the authorities and to his
brother Parma Nand, it would reveal the background in which accused-appellant was under extreme
mental disturbance which lead him commit serious crime. We may mention that these applications/
letters are used by the prosecution for establishing the motive behind the crime but, at the same time,
Court overlooked the serious agony suffered by the accused which is revealed in applications. First
application dated 22nd March, 1990 is written to the Deputy Commissioner, Rohtak for protection of
his family members from the respondents and restricting them from encroaching on their plot. The
application, inter alia, reads as under :-

"On 2-2-1990 the applicant went on leave to his village at the ailment of his father. At that time the
respondents raised the matter and warned me that he could go on his duty after lifting the encroachment
from the plot. The opposite party have three time (sic) family members to us. They are strong headed
rich persons. Seeing the opposition very strong, the applicant felt that the efforts would go useless.
He called a Panchayat to sort out the matter. The Panchayat also said that the plot was the property
of applicant and the respondents were encroaching it illegally. The respondents did not accept the
decision of Panchayat. After my return at duty, the opposite party attacked on my family. They wanted
to kill my whole family. My family like parents, brothers and the wives of my brothers except my
younger sister, received grievous injuries. The applicant was told by his brother about the feud on
19-3-1990. His brother returned on 20-3-1990 after telling the whole talks. My father and brothers
were got locked up in the Police Station, Sampla by conniving with the officials. The applicant's party
tried his best to lodge the FIR against the opposite party but in vain. After the struggle a cross case
was entered. Now both sides are on bail. The family of applicant is harassed by this way. They are
giving open threat that if they would not hand over the possession of the plot they could be killed.
The family of applicant hesitate to come out from their houses due to the fear of opposite party. In
such circumstances I feel . . . . . to do my duty and I consider that I shall lose my balance of mind.
Hence the action be taken against the opposite party and a direction be issued to protect my family
and property. If it is not done his family can be ruined."

11. The next application dated 2-4-1990 is written by the appellant to the Superintendent of Police
(S.P.), Rohtak. In that application, appellant has requested S.P., Rohtak to take action against Chater
Singh, Hawa Singh, Satbir Singh, Rajbir and Suresh. The relevant part of the application is as under :-

"I am serving in B.S.F. My father Sh. Suraj Bhan and my younger brother live in village Samchana
P.S., Sampla. Now-a-days, I am on leave. I have one ghar which is a ancestral property and surrounds
of walls and we keep luggage in it. Chater Singh, Hawa Singh, Satbir, Rajbir and Suresh s/o Sh.
Mange Ram and their sons want to take possession forcibly of our ghar. So my father had filed civil
suit on 12-2-1990 and stay order is granted for that Ghar. My father is an old man and we are alone.
But the family members of Chater Singh are strong persons.

@page-SC1338

These persons interfered in our possession in spite of stay order and they want to possess forcibly our
ghar. We had already filed an application before you, and you have marked it to the SHO vide No.
601 SPR, dated 29-3-1990, but no action has been taken against them up till now. The above noted

Registered To : Principal 7
© Copyright with AIR Infotech, All India Reporter. All rights reserved
 All India Reporter

persons and their sons namely Krishan, Dilbag s/o Chater Singh, Surinder s/o Hawa Singh harass us.
They always keep ready for quarrel and they are bent upon to possess forcibly our ghar."

12. Thereafter, there is another application Ex. PV/3, dated 20-3-1990 written to the S.P., Rohtak
which, inter alia, recites as under :-

"I joined my duty on finishing my leaves. I went to do my duty. I am serving in B.S.F. My younger
brother and an old father live in village house. My mother and my wife were attacked seriously and
they were trying to possess the abovesaid Ghar. The accused are as under :-

1. Chater Singh 2. Hawa Singh, 3. Satbir Singh, 4. Rajbir Singh, 5. Suresh s/o Sh. Mange Ram, 6.
Krishan, 7. Dilbag s/o Sh. Chater Singh, 8. Gurinder s/o Sh. Hawa Singh and remaining persons of
their family. After that my father lodged the report to the SHO P.S., Sampla for restraining them to
possess the plot. But the SHO did not take any action; conniving with the accused, the SHO confined
my brother and father instead of them. They were threatened by dire consequences and they demanded
five thousand as ransom We are unable to arrange the money. So no action has been taken against
those culprits. I come on leave for two months in a year. They do not let me remain peacefully and
they harass us on the one pretext or the other. There is no solace in our house. It is very difficult to
come out from the house."

(Emphasis added)

13. The next application Ex. PV/10, dated 15th May, 1990 written to S.P., Rohtak, inter alia, reads
as under:-

"On 11-5-1990 in the morning time when our sister and the wives of our brothers went to throw dung
in the morning in our ghar at that time, suddenly accused came out and attacked upon them and they
inflicted grievous injuries to them with their jaili and lathies. The accused inflicted grievous injuries to
the wife of my younger brother, who has a foetus of seven months in her stomach. She is in dangerous
condition and admitted in Ward No. 2 of MCH, Rohtak. We had lodged the report in Police Station,
Sampla about that matter. The accused stayed for two days in the Police Station and then they were
released and no action was taken against them. These persons are giving threats after their release.

So, it is requested that legal action be taken against the accused so that my life and property may be
protected from those persons and justice be done."

14. Lastly, we would refer to the letter dated 21st June, 1990 written to his brother Parma Nand which
is reproduced in paragraph 61 of the Judgment rendered by the learned Sessions Judge. The incident
took place on 28th June, 1990 and the said letter was written a week prior to the occurrence. It is true
that this letter reveals that appellant was drawing concrete action against the complainant party. But
from the letter, it appears that appellant was deeply annoyed, may be because as stated in the letter
"We had taken ourselves dead when they had attacked our women-folk and sister." It also reveals
that the act of the appellant was pre-planned. This letter no doubt reveals the mind of the appellant-
accused to the effect that he has decided to take revenge and was planning to take a concrete step in
that behalf and that he was keeping it secret. In the said letter, he has further written that at best, it

Registered To : Principal 8
© Copyright with AIR Infotech, All India Reporter. All rights reserved
 All India Reporter

would take 15 days for him for taking action and "if we are to die, let this thing happen. If possible,
give a prompt reply and write which wall they were demolishing. Take heed of what I have written."

15. Learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that High Court as well as the Sessions Court ought to
have referred to all the letters/applications written by the appellant and not only the last letter written
by him to find out the motive and the well thought-out manner in which murders were committed.
It is his contention that aforesaid applications written by the appellant to the authorities reveal that
the accused was compelled to resort to the crime because he and his family members were finding
helpless.

16. This submission of the learned counsel for the appellant requires to be accepted. From the
aforestated applications to S.P., Rohtak or Commissioner, it appears that accused was all

@page-SC1339

throughout feeling that he and his family members were humiliated by the other party who were
rich and influential and who were intending to grab the plot/Ghar belonging to them. Applications
reveal that appellant-accused was feeling much more hurt because family members of the appellant
including women-folk were not getting any police protection even though they were assaulted. It has
been pointed out in the application that his younger brother's wife having seven months' pregnancy
was assaulted and she was required to be hospitalised. It also reveals that for a period of more than
three months appellant was requesting the authorities to take action so that he and his family members
can live in peace. It was his allegation that the SHO of the Police Station was conniving with the other
side and had demanded five thousand rupees as a ransom which their family members were unable to
pay, therefore, no action was taken against the other party. He has pointed out that Panchayat has also
arrived at the conclusion that the property belonged to his family and yet other party was encroaching
upon it. It was his grievance that despite the stay order granted by the Civil Court, other party wanted
to take possession forcibly. The last letter written to his brother indicates that wall of the house was
demolished. It is also stated that even though his parents, brothers and wives of his brothers received
grievous injuries in the assault, yet they were locked up in the Police Station, Sampla because of
favour by the Officer. They tried to lodge the FIR against the other party but it was in vain and after
some struggle, cross cases were registered and both the sides were released on bail. He has also stated
that in such a situation, he may lose balance of mind. It appears that this situation continued and on
11th May, 1990 further incident took place when the accused (other party) inflicted injuries to the
wife of younger brother of accused having seven months' pregnancy which resulted in these murders.

17. Considering the aforesaid background of the matter, the question would be whether the case of
the appellant could be one of the "rarest of the rare" cases so that death sentence is required to be
imposed. In our view, even though this is a gruesome act on the part of the appellant, yet it is a result
of human mind going astray because of constant harassment of the family members of the appellant
as narrated above. It could be termed as a case of retribution or act for taking revenge. No doubt, it
would not be a justifiable act at all, but the accused was feeling morally justifiable on his part. Hence,
it would be difficult to term it as the "rarest of the rare" cases. Further, this is not a crime committed
because of lust for wealth or women, that is to say, murders are neither for money such as extortion,
dacoity or robbery; nor even for lust and rape; it is not an act of anti-social element, kidnapping and

Registered To : Principal 9
© Copyright with AIR Infotech, All India Reporter. All rights reserved
 All India Reporter

trafficking in minor girls or of an anti-social element dealing in dangerous drugs which affects the
entire moral fibre of the society and kills number of persons; nor is it crime committed for power or
political ambitions or part of organised criminal activities. It is a crime committed by the accused who
had a cause to feel aggrieved for injustice meted out to his family members at the hands of the family
of the other party who according to him were strong enough physically as well as economically and
having influence with the authority which was required to protect him and his family. The bitterness
increased to a boiling point and because of the agony suffered by him and his family members at
the hands of the other party and for not getting protection from the police officers concerned or total
inaction despite repeated written prayers goaded or compelled the accused to take law in his own
hands which culminated in gruesome murders; may be that his mind got derailed of the track and
went astray or beyond control because of extreme mental disturbances for the constant harassment
and disputes. Further considering the facts and circumstances, it cannot be said that he would be a
menace to the society; there is no reason to believe that he cannot be reformed or rehabilitated and
that he is likely to continue criminal acts of violence as would constitute a continuing threat to the
society. He was working in B.S.F. as a disciplined member of the Armed Forces aged about 23 at the
relevant time, having no criminal antecedent.

18. In the result, we are of the view that this case cannot be treated as one of the rarest of rare
cases where lesser sentence of imprisonment of life would not at all be adequate. Hence, we alter
the sentence of death penalty by awarding the sentence of imprisonment for life to the appellant. The
appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent

@page-SC1340

and stands disposed of accordingly.

Order Accordingly .

Registered To : Principal 10
© Copyright with AIR Infotech, All India Reporter. All rights reserved