http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 9  

PETITIONER: UMASHANKAR PANDA

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       28/02/1996

BENCH: VENKATASWAMI K. (J) BENCH: VENKATASWAMI K. (J) ANAND, A.S. (J)

CITATION:  JT 1996 (2)   747        1996 SCALE  (2)563

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                       J U D G M E N T K. Venkataswami.J.      The appellant  who is  in Central Jail, Indore has sent through superintendent  a Petition to set aside the impugned judgment of  the Madhya  Pradesh High Court, Bench at Indore confirming  the   death  sentence   imposed  by   the  First Additional Sessions  Judge, Ujjain.  The said  Petition  was taken on file as Special leave Petition and this Court after granting leave  called for the records from the trial court. The High  Court was also requested to transmit to this Court the copies each of the judgment of the High Court as well as the trial court.      This appeal  is directed  against the  judgment of  the Division Bench  of the  Madhya Pradesh  High Court, Bench at Indore in  Death Reference  No.2/95 and  Criminal Appeal No. 173/95. The  appellant accused  was convicted  under Section 302 I.P.C.  for having  committed murder of his wife Krishna Bai, daughter  Jyoti aged  10 years,  daughter Rekha aged 16 years and  under Section  307 I.P.C.  for attempt  to commit murder of his daughter Komal aged 10 years,  son Balakrishan aged 12  years and  another Son  Sonu aged  7 years  on  the intervening night of 20th and 21st February, 1994 in Village Laxmipura,  Police  Station  Kayatha  District  Ujjain.  The prosecution case is as follows :      On the  intervening night  of 20th  and 21st  February. 1994, the  accused committed  murder of  his  wife  and  two daughters and  they died  on the  spot. The  further  caused injuries to  Komal (daughter)  and two  sons Balakrishna and Sonu with  intent to  commit murder.  However,  these  three survived even  after sustaining  grievious injuries. P.W.13, Satnam Singh.  Station House  Officer received an annonymous telephonic information  that  many  persons  have  sustained injuries and  some of them have died at the residence of the accused. On  receiving such  information, the Police Officer reached the  spot and  found Balakrishna,  Sonu and Komal in seriously injured  condition. Krishna  Bai, Rekha  and Jyoti

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 9  

were found  to be  dead by  that time.  The accused  was no. found inside the house. The said Police Officer sent all the injured  to  hospital  for  treatment  and  registered  case No.1/94, 2/94  and 3/94  regarding the  death of the persons referred to  above. He  recovered blood stained sword on the spot. that  clothes, lock  and chappal were also found with. blood  stains   and  they  were  also  seized.  Stained  and unstained earth  were also collected from the spot. Site map was prepared.  An inquest was held and various injuries were noticed on  the bodies of the different persons. The accused was arrested  on the same day and Panchnama was prepared and on questioning,  the accused  gave information  about  sword which  he   had  kept.  in  the  wheat  field  belonging  to Radheshyam. The  clothes of  the accused.  Kurta and  Pajama With blood  stains were  also recovered from a trunk. During investigation, it  was found  that the  accused  made  extra judicial confession  of having  committed murder of his wife and children before Prahlad (P.W.6) and Rora (P.W.7).      The autopsy  on the  body of Rekha aged about 16, years was conducted  by Dr. Arvind Dashottar (P.W.3) on, 21.2.1994 and the  following injuries  were found  on the  body of the deceased Rekha :      1. A big incised wound extending in      four direction  from left  pinna as      following:      (a)  4"x   2"  over   left  tempero      occipital  region    cut  Piece  of      occipital bone measuring 1/4"x 1/4"      present in  the wound.  Dura matter      exposed.      (b) 4"x  2" from  angle of the left      eye towards  left  pinna.  Mandible      bone exposed.      (c) Incised  wound 2"x1" from angle      of left mandible upto left pinna.      (d) Incised  wound 2"x1"  from back      of back of neck towards(L) pinna .      2.  Incised   wound  3"x1/2"  below      injury No.1 over accipital region.      3. Incised  wound  over  skull  (L)      parietal region 3"x1/2".      4.   Incised   wound   over   front      parietal region 5 1/2"x1". Parietal      bone incised.  5 1/2"  membrane cut      at the  middle  with  brain  matter      incised   1/2"    below   membrance      parietal lobe of brain.      5. Incised  wound over (L) shoulder      on top 1/2"x1/2" muscle deep.      6. Incised  wound over  (L) base of      (R) Thumb 1"x1/2".      7. Incised  wound (L) Dorsal aspect      of hand 2"x1/2".      8.  Incised   wound  (L)  fore  arm      dorsal aspect 2"x1/2".      9. Incised  wound Palmar  aspect of      (L) hand  3"x1/2" below  little and      Ring  finger.  All  these  injuries      were antemortem in nature.      In the opinion of the doctor, these      injuries were  sufficient to  cause      death.      Likewise the autopsy on the body of      Krishnabai was  conducted by  P.W.3      with Dr.  M.D. Sharma  on 21.2.1994

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 9  

    and  they   found   the   following      injuries:      (1)   Incised   wound   over   nose      extending upto (L) frontal region 5      1/2"x2" from  Rt. to  (L) obliquely      upwards,    muscle    deep.    ends      lapering.      (2) Incised wound over (L) parietal      region 3"x1/2", bone exposed.      (3) Incised wound near injury No. 2      over vertex 2"x1/4" bone exposed.      (4) Incised  wound 3"x1"  over  (R)      parietal region bone exposed.      (5) Incised  wound behind  (L)  ear      1"x1/2".      (6) Incised wound on left side face      from   (L)    eye-brow    extending      backward  and   downwards   towards      tragus  of   ear  5   1/2"  slicing      effect, skin held out.      (7) Incised wound 3"x/1/2" (L) side      of neck  at the base on pest aspect      3"x1/2".      (8) Incised  wound 1/2"x4"  back of      chest  in   between  scapular  skin      deep.      (9) Incised wound 1/4"x1/2" lataral      aspect of (R) arm mid position.      (10) Incised  wound dorsum  of Hand      (R) extending  towards forearm from      knunles upwards tenders and muscles      cut. Radious and ulna bones exposed      and cut at the distal ends.      (11) Incised  wound  3"x1/2"    (R)      forearm dorsal  aspect above injury      no.      (12)  Incised  wound  4"x1/2"  over      palmar aspect of (L) hand extending      over wrist.      (13)  Incised   wound  over  dorsal      aspect  (L)   forearm   3"x1"   mid      position.      (14) Incised  wound (L) forearm 4"x      1  1/2"   muscle  and   vessels  cu      Radious bone cut at mid.      (15)   Incised   wound   over   (L)      shoulder       1/2"x1"       muscle      deep.      (16) Incised  wound (L)   Arm  1/4"      skin deep  mid     position.      (17) Incised  wound 3"x1/2"  palmar      aspect of  (L) hand  metacarpel cut      thumb extending upto wrist.      (18)  Incised  wound  3"x1/4"  over      ulnar   border    of   (L)    hand:      metacarpal bone  cut  below  little      finger.      (19) Incised  wound 3"x1"  over (L)      thigh and knee joint.      (20) lncised  wound over knee joint      (R) 2 1/2"x1/2" muscle deep.      (21) Incised  wound over  (R)  heel      attached  with   a  Lag    of  skin      posteriorly  complete   tissue  and      calcaneous bone  cut 3"x around the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 9  

    heel.             On 21.2.94  P.W.3  conducted      Post-mortem of   the  dead  body of      Jyoti  and   found  the   following      injuries  on   the  person  of  the      deceased:      (i)   Incised  wound  2"x1/2"  over      skull right  frontal  region,  skin      deep, bona visible.      (ii) Incised  wound 5  1/2"x1  1/2"      over skull Top bone exposed.      (iii) Incised  wound  3"x1/2"  over      vertex of skull.      (iv) Incised  wound 3"x1"  (L) side      of  neck   from  left   border   of      mandible horizontal muscle, vessels      cut.      (v)  Incised   wound  below  injury      no.iv. 3"x1"  tapering towards  (L)      angle of  mouth. There  was only  a      Tag of  skin between  injury no. iv      and v vessels cut.      (vi) Incised wound Left hand palmar      aspect extending from 2" over wrist      towards  palm  4th  metacarpal  and      carpel bones cut.      (vii)  Incised   wound  L   side  3      1/2"x1/2" dorsum  of hand extending      from base  of  index  finger  arose      hand 5th metacarpal bone cut.      (viii)  Incised  wound  over  elbow      1/2"x1/2".      (ix)   Incised   wound   over   (4)      scapular region 1"x1/2".      (x) Liner  abrasion 5" with incised      wound at  2 1/2"  from  start  1/4"      below (L) scapular.      P.W.4 Dr.   R.  S. Dangad found the      following injuries  while admitting      Sonu in the Hospital:      (1) Incised  wound 6"x1"  deep  and      bone-cutting on  the right parietal      region.      (2) Incised  wound 6"x1"  bone deep      on  the   right   fronte   parietal      region.      (3) Incised  wound 5"x1"  bone deep      exposing bone left parietal region.      (4) Incised  wound 1 3/4x 1/4"x1/2"      on the right nendible.      Dr. Nagar  (P.W.12) examined  Komal      and found the following injuries.      1. Incised wound 3"x1" bone deep on      the L cheek.      2. Incised wound 5"x1" on the neck.      3. Incised wound 4"x1" bone deep on      the right  knee muscles and vessels      cut.      4. Incised  wound  1"x1/2"x1/2"  on      the  proximal   of  finger   middle      finger.      5. Ring  finger was  cut  upto  PIB      joint.      6. Incised  wound  1"x1/2"x1/2"  on      the index finger of left hand.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 9  

    7. Incised  wound  2"x1/2"x1/2"  on      the back of left hand.      8. Incised  wound  4"x1/2"x1/2"  on      the back of left wrist hand finger.      9. Incised  wound 1  1/2"x1/2"x1/4"      on Rt. wrist dorsal surface.      10 Incised  wound 2"x1/2"x1/2" on L      hand dorsal surface.      11.  Incised   wound   2"x1/2"x1/2"      oblique wrist dorsal surface.      12. Incised  wound 1 1/2"x1/2"x1/2"      oblique  Lt.  P.A.  dorsal  surface      long cut.      P.W.12    Dr.     Nagar    examined      Balakrishna on  the  same  day  and      found following injuries:      1. All  fingers amputed  from  M.P.      joint excepting thump.      2.  Incised  wound  on  right  face      extending upto right eye.      3. Incised  wound on  the left next      3" x 2"x2".      4. Incised  wound 2"x1"x1"  on  Rt.      chin.      The  materials   seized  were   sent   for   serologist examination and  it was found that it contained human blood. After completion  of investigation,  chargesheet  was  filed against the  accused. The case was committed to the court of sessions. The  accused pleaded not guilty. The learned Trial judge convicted  and  sentenced  the  accused  as  mentioned above.      The learned  trial judge  has given special reasons for awarding death  sentence. The accused preferred an appeal to the High  Court. It  was taken  up for  hearing  with  Death Reference. The  High Court  in its  elaborate judgment found that the  fact of commission of murder, by causing grievious injuries, to  Balakrishna, Sonu  and Komal  had been  proved beyond reasonable  doubt  and  accused  was  rightly  found guilty for  the same.  Regarding the  sentence, the  learned Judges after  referring to  several judgments  of this Court and also  a Division  Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court found that  the case of the accused fell within the cases of the ’rarest  of rare  cases’ and  there were  no  mitigating circumstances whatsoever  for commission  of gruesome murder of wife  and two  children. Accordingly while dismissing the appeal filed  by the  accused accepted the reference made by the learned Additional sessions Judge.      It is under these circumstances, the present appeal was filed by the accused who is in jail. Mr. Vimal Dave, learned counsel for  the accused  appellant finding  the fool  proof case of  the prosecution  did not  attempt to  challenge the conviction  recorded  by  the  learned  Sessions  Judge  and confirmed by  the High Court. However, he strenuously argued that there  is a case for reducing the death sentence to one of life imprisonment in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this  case.  According  to the learned counsel, the murder was not  a pre-planned one and having regard to the time and place of  the incident  it must  be taken  that  it was  on account of  sudden  provocation  and  as  suggested by  the defence  in   the  cross-examination   of  the   prosecution witnesses, that  the suspicion  entertained by  the  accused regarding the  fidelity of  his wife and answer said to have been given  by her  led to  the incident.  According  to the learned counsel  there was  no mensrea  and  no  motive

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 9  

was suggested by the prosecution for committing the there murders and causing injuries to the children.      Learned counsel  appearing for the respondent, however, submitted that  the  findings  rendered by the trial court as well as  by the  High Court on appreciation of oral evidence will go  to show that the appellant has committed the murder in a  gruesome manner  without any  provocation and  against helpless dependents. As per the decided cases of this Court, the death  sentence awarded to the accused does not call for any interference.      We have  considered the rival submissions. Before going into the  facts of this case as found by the trial court and the High  Court, it will be useful to set out the principles laid down  by this Court in several cases for awarding death sentence.      In Anshad and others vs. state of Karnataka (1994)4 SCC 381, a two Judge bench of this Court presided over by one of us (Anand, J.) has observed as follows"      "Courts  are  expected  to  exhibit      sensitiveness  in   the  matter  of      sward of sentence particularly, the      sentence of death because life once      lost cannot  be brought  back. This      Court has  in cases  more than  one      emphasised that for determining the      proper sentence in a case like this      while the  court should  take  into      account       the       aggravating      circumstances   it    should    not      overlook or  ignore the  mitigating      circumstances. The  manner in which      the  crime   was   committed,   the      weapons used  and the  brutality or      the lack  of it  are  some  of  the      considerations   which    must   be      present to  the mind  of the court.      Of course,  the High  Court has the      power and  jurisdiction to  enhance      the sentence  of life  imprisonment      to death  but that  power has to be      sparingly exercised,  in "rarest of      the  rare   cases"   for   ’special      reasons’ to be recorded. The courts      must be  alive to  the  legislative      changes introduced  in 1973 through      Section   354   (3)   CrPC.   Death      sentence, being an exception to the      general rule,  should be awarded in      the "rarest  of the rare cases" for      ’Special reasons’  to be   recorded      after balancing the aggravating and      the  mitigating  circumstances,  in      the facts  and circumstances  of  a      given case.  The number  of persons      murdered  is  a  consideration  but      that is  not the only consideration      for imposing  death penalty  unless      the case  falls in  the category of      "rarest of  the  rare  cases".  The      courts must keep in view the nature      of the  crime, the  brutality  with      which   it    was   executed,   the      antecedents of  the  criminal,  the      weapons used  etc.  It  is  neither

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 9  

    possible nor desirable to catalogue      all such  factors and  they  depend      upon case to case."      In Jashubha  Bharatsinh Gohil  & Others  Vs.  state  of Gujarat (1994) 4 SCC 358, this Court has observed as follows in paragraph 12 of the judgment:      "It is  needless for  us to go into      the principles  laid down  by  this      Court regarding  the enhancement of      sentence as also about the award of      sentence of  death, as  the law  on      both these  subjects  in  now  well      settled. There is undoubtedly power      of enhancement  available with  the      High Court  which, however,  has to      be sparingly exercised. No hard and      fast rule can be laid down as to in      which  case   the  High  Court  may      enhance  the   sentence  from  life      imprisonment to   death.  Each case      depends on  its own  facts and on a      variety of  factors. The courts are      constantly faced with the situation      were they are required to answer to      new  challenges   and   mould   the      sentencing system to challenges and      mould the sentencing system to meet      those  challenges.   Protection  of      society and  deterring the criminal      is the  avowed object  of  law  and      that is  required to be achieved by      imposing  appropriate sentence. The      change    in     the    legislative      intendment  relating  to  award  of      capital punishment notwithstanding,      the opposition  by the  protagonist      of abolition  of capital  sentence,      shows that  it is  expected of  the      courts to so operate the sentencing      system as  to impose  such sentence      which    reflects     the    social      conscience  of   the  society.  The      sentencing process  has to be stern      where it should be."      Again in  paragraph 14  of the  same  judgment  it  was observed that  it is  only after  giving due  weight to  the mitigating as well as the aggravating circumstances, that it must proceed to impose the appropriate sentence’.      In suresh  Chandra Bahri vs. state of Punjab 1995 supp. (1) SCC  80,  in  paragraph  105,  this  Court  observed  as follows:      "The cold-blooded  cruel murder  of      the innocent  children by none else      but by  their own real father shows      the enormous  proportion with which      it was committed eliminating almost      all members  of the family. WE have      given  our   serious  thoughts  and      consideration   and    posed    the      question to ourselves whether there      could be  still a  worse case  than      this where  a husband could hatch a      conspiracy and  kill his  wife in a      most callous and ghastly fashion as      in  the  present  case  only  on  a

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 9  

    trifling matter  which  could  have      been  sorted  out  in  an  amicable      manner for  which to effort appears      to have  been made  by suresh.  Not      only this  but the appellant suresh      became thirsty  of the blood of his      own  children   for  absolutely  no      fault of  theirs. in  the facts and      circumstances discussed  above,  in      our  opinion,   so  far  as  suresh      bahari is  concerned, the  rule  of      the rarest  of rare cases has to be      applied as  the present  case falls      within the  category of  the rarest      of   rare   cases   and   for   the      perpetration of  the crime  of  the      nature discussed  above there could      be no  other  proper  and  adequate      sentence  except  the  sentence  of      death as  there are  no  mitigating      circumstances what  soever.  Having      regard  to   all  the   facts   and      circumstances of  the present  case      as far as suresh Bahri is concerned      there   is   no   cause   for   any      interference in  the vies  taken by      the two  courts below  in  awarding      the  death  sentence  to  him.  We,      therefore,  affirm  the  conviction      and sentence  of death  awarded  to      Suresh by  the High  Court. In  the      event of  the  execution  of  death      sentence,  the   sentence   awarded      under   Sentence    awarded   under      section 201 of the IPC shall remain      only of academic interest."      As the  commission of  the crime  has been  established beyond reasonable doubt and as the counsel for the appellant also fairly  pleaded only  for the reduction of sentence, we need not  probe into  the conviction  aspect once again. We, therefore, proceed on the footing that the accused/appellant has committed  murder of  his  wife  and  two  children  and attempted to  kill the remaining three children, but (to the surprise  of   the  accused)   they  escaped  with  grievous injuries. Our  concern in  the present  appeal is  about the manner of  committing the murder, weapons used, the position of the  victims and  the circumstances under which the crime was committed  and to  find out whether the case falls under the category  of "rarest  of the rare cases" in the light of principles already  noticed through  the judgments  of  this Court.      Before that,  we  may  also  point  out  that  we  have independently and  carefully gone  through the evidence both oral  and   documentary  and   we  are  convinced  that  the convictions of the appellant for offences under Sections 302 and 307  I.P.C. awarded  by the  learned Sessions  Judge and confirmed by  the learned  Judges  of  the  High  Court  are unassailable and  are quite in accord with oral, documentary and medical evidence.      Now, let  us look  into the way the accused had carried out the  murder of  his wife  and two  children  and  caused grievous injuries  to the rest of his children in the course of his  attempt to  liquidate them  also. From  the evidence which has  been accepted  by the  trial court  and the  High Court, the following emerges :

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 9  

    On 20th  February, 1994,  the accused, his wife and all the five children took their dinner together before going to the bed and had also viewed the programme on the television. The accused  along with  his family members slept in a room. At about  12-1 on  the intervening  night of  20th and  21st February, 1994,  the accused  started to  kill his wife with the help  of a  sword  and  on  hearing  the  shoutings  the children woke up. The wife questioned the accused why he was trying to kill her and the accused without giving any answer inflicted more  injuries on her head, hand and foot. By that time, the eldest daughter Rekha tried to save her mother and instead  of   leaving  his  wife  from  attack,  he  started inflicting wounds  on his first daughter Rekha with the same sword. Not  satisfied with  that, he also inflicted injuries with the same sword to another daughter and finding that the sword he had used had been bent, he left that sword and took out another  big sword,  kept in a box in the room, and with the help  of the  second sword, he inflicted injuries to the other children.  All the  injured persons  fell down  and as seen earlier,  the wife  and two  children succumbed  to the injuries and  the other  three  children  succumbed  to  the injuries and  the other  three children escaped death. It is also in  the evidence  of P.W.7  Rora that the accused after committing the crime, confessed to him (PW 7) stating "I had slaughtered all  of them,  how the  three left  alive".  The above attitude  of the  accused clearly  reveals that he had caused injuries  with a view to liquidate all the members of his family  and he was not happy to find that inspite of his act his three children had escaped from death.      We have  already given  the injuries  inflicted on  the deceased persons  as well  as on  the children  who  escaped death. We  find that the accused had accused in all 64 sword injuries to all the six persons including the three deceased persons and  those injuries  speak for  themselve about  the gruesome nature of the crime committed by the accused. Be it noted that  there was no provocation and there is nothing to suggested that there was any quarrel between the accused and his wife  or among any one of the family members. The way in which the  crime was  executed clearly  shows that  it was a premeditated one and not on account of sudden provocation or any ’mental-derange’.  The motive suggested in the course of cross examination  of the  prosecution witnesses is also not helpful to  the accused  inasmuch as he had pleaded alibi in his statement (under Section 313 Cr. P.C.) and that has also been taken note of by the trial court as well as by the High Court. As  pointed out  earlier, both the Sessions Judge and the High Court have given special reasons for awarding death sentence and  we are  also of  the opinion  that  the  crime indulged  by  the  accused  is  undoubtedly  gruesome,  cold blooded, heinous, atrocious and cruel. We are also satisfied that on  the facts  established on the record, there ap[pear so  to  be  mitigating  circumstance  whatsoever,  but  only aggravating circumstance  which justify  the  imposition  of death sentence.  If we  look into  the manner  in which  the crime was  committed, the  weapon used, the brutality of the crime, number  of persons  murdered, the helplessness of the victims, we  cannot come  to any other conclusion except the one, the  Sessions Judge  and the  High court  arrived at to award the capital sentence to the appellant.      In the  result, the  appeal fails  and it  is dismissed consequently.