Supreme Court: Applying the “rarest of rare” criterion in a triple murder case, the Court commuted the death sentence of the appellant to life sentence and held that the number of deaths or the factum of whole family being wiped off or brutality cannot be the sole criteria for determining whether the case falls into the category of “rarest of rare”. The 3-judge bench of Hon’ble H.L. Dattu, Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya and M.Y. Eqbal, JJ was of the opinion that a deliberately planned crime, executed meticulously in a diabolic manner, exhibiting inhuman conduct in a ghastly manner, touching the conscience of everyone and thereby disturbing the natural fiber of society would call for imposition of capital punishment so as to ensure deterrence. The Court was of the view that in a civilized society, a tooth for a tooth and an eye for an eye ought not to be the criterion to clothe a case with “rarest of the rare” jacket and the Courts must not be propelled by such notions in a haste resorting to capital punishment. In the present case, the appellant had murdered his nephew on account of his suspicion on his wifes fidelity and his abhorrence for her relationship with the deceased. Due to extreme fear of being caught, he murdered pregnant daughter-in-law and grandson, who had witnessed his crime, with the urge of silencing them. Considering the facts of the case, the Court held that the 2 sets of murders were committed with different motives and hence do not fall within the “rarest of the rare” category. [Gudda@ Dwarikendra v. State of Madhya Pradesh, Criminal Appeals Nos. 1566-1567 of 2013, decided on September 30, 2013]
Posted on: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 10:11:31 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015