1977 (4) TMI 172 - SC - Indian Laws

Issues Involved:
1. Acquittal of accused Nos. 1 and 2.
2. Conviction of accused No. 3 under s. 302 read with s. 34 and the sentence of death.
3. Conviction of accused Nos. 9 to 12 under s. 302 read with s. 34 and the enhancement of their sentence from life imprisonment to death.
4. The procedural compliance concerning the hearing on the question of sentence under s. 235(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Acquittal of Accused Nos. 1 and 2:
The High Court acquitted accused Nos. 1 and 2, holding that the offence of conspiracy was not proven. The prosecution's reliance on the evidence of the two approvers, Ganpat and Shankar, was critical. The Sessions Judge accepted both approvers' testimonies, but the High Court rejected Ganpat's evidence and accepted Shankar's. The legal position regarding accomplice evidence requires corroboration in material particulars. Ganpat's testimony was found unreliable due to contradictions and lack of credibility. Shankar's evidence, though more credible, lacked independent corroboration regarding the involvement of accused Nos. 1 and 2 in the conspiracy. The High Court's acquittal of accused Nos. 1 and 2 was confirmed as there was no justification to interfere with the conclusion.

2. Conviction of Accused No. 3:
Accused No. 3 was convicted for the murders of Gayabai, Shakila, Sugandhabai, and Nasima. The prosecution relied on the evidence of the approvers, the discovery of incriminating articles, and the retracted confession of accused No. 3. The evidence of Ganpat was discarded, but Shankar's testimony, corroborated by the discovery of article 17 (shirt pieces stained with blood), was sufficient to uphold the conviction. The High Court and the Sessions Court's concurrent view that the complicity of accused No. 3 was proven beyond a reasonable doubt was affirmed. The charge of conspiracy failed, and the conviction under s. 302 read with s. 34 was upheld, along with the sentence of death.

3. Conviction and Sentence of Accused Nos. 9 to 12:
Accused Nos. 9 to 12 were convicted for the murders of Haribai, Taramati, and Kamal. The evidence against them included the eyewitness account of Umaji, discoveries of incriminating articles, injuries on accused No. 10, and the movements of the accused. The High Court enhanced their sentence from life imprisonment to death. The evidence of Umaji was found credible and corroborated by the discovery of blood-stained articles and injuries. Accused No. 12 was acquitted due to insufficient corroboration and doubts about his identification. The conviction of accused Nos. 9, 10, and 11 under s. 302 read with s. 34 was upheld, and the death sentence was confirmed.

4. Procedural Compliance under s. 235(2) Cr.P.C.:
The accused contended that they were not heard on the question of sentence, violating s. 235(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. The Court provided an opportunity to the accused to make submissions on the question of sentence. The provision requires the Court to hear the accused on the question of sentence after recording the conviction. The Court concluded that it is not always necessary to remand the matter to the trial court for hearing on the sentence. Instead, the higher court can remedy the breach by giving the accused an opportunity to present their case on the sentence. The death sentence for accused Nos. 3, 9, 10, and 11 was upheld after considering their submissions.

Conclusion:
1. The acquittal of accused Nos. 1 and 2 was upheld.
2. The conviction and death sentence of accused No. 3 were affirmed.
3. The conviction and death sentence of accused Nos. 9, 10, and 11 were upheld, while accused No. 12 was acquitted.
4. The procedural compliance under s. 235(2) Cr.P.C. was addressed by hearing the accused on the question of sentence at the appellate stage.

← Previous Next →