AJAY PANDIT @ JAGDISH DAYABHAI PATEL & ANR. versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Citation: [2012] 10 S.C.R. 70 · Decided: 17-07-2012 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN · Disposal: Case Partly allowed
Cited by 6 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2012] 10 S.C.R. 70 
AJAY PANDIT @ JAGDISH DAYABHAI PATEL & ANR. 
v. 
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA 
(Criminal Appeal No. 864 of 2006) 
JULY 17, 2012 
[K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND DIPAK MISRA, JJ.] 
Penal Code, 1860 - ss. 419, 420, 302, 307, 397, 342 
and 328 - Cheating, Murder and attempt to murder - Two 
C separate incidents - Accused luring the victims to send them 
to America for better prospects - Extracting money from them 
- Instead of sending them to America, murdered one person 
in first incident and in the second incident murdered one and 
attempted to murder two - First case based on circumstantial 
D evidence - Eye-witnesses (victims) in the second incident -
Conviction and life imprisonment by trial court - High Court 
confirming the conviction and enhancing the sentence to 
death - On appeal, held: Conviction justified - In the fist case, 
the witness proved the chain of links in the case - In the 
E second case also the evidence of victim eye-witness, other 
witnesses and documentary evidence have proved the 
prosecution case - However, the High Court enhanced the 
sentence to death without following the procedure u/s. 235(2) 
Cr. P. C. and without taking into consideration the relevant 
F factors while awarding death sentence - Therefore, death 
sentence set aside and matter remitted to High Court to 
decide the sentence by following s. 235(2) - Code of Criminal 
Procedure, 1973 - s. 235(2) - Sentence. 
The appellant-accused was prosecuted for two 
G murders in two separate incidents. He used to lure the 
vulnerable into his trap for sending them to America for 
better prospects in life. 
The first incident relates to the murder of deceased 
H 
70 
AJAY PANDIT@ JAGDISH DAYABHAI PATEL v. STATE 
71 
OF MAHARASHTRA 
'N' which took place in February 1994. Prosecution case 
A 
was that PW5 (sister of the deceased) and PW6 (brother-
in-law of the deceased) were acquainted with the accused. 
They wanted the accused to send the deceased to 
America. Accused demanded Rs. 2,50,000/- for this. 
Initially Rs. 1, 10,000/- was required to be paid. After B 
payment of the initial amount, the accused asked PW6 to 
send the deceased to Bombay, Railway Station with 
return ticket of the accused and asked for further amount 
of Rs. 3500/- for medical expenses and for arranging visa. 
PW6 reached Bombay with the deceased. PW6 leaving c 
the deceased in the company of the accused, left for his 
home. The deceased did not reach home. The accused 
informed that the deceased had already left for America. 
In November, 1994, PW6 came to know through 
newspaper reports that the accused was arrested for an 
0 
incident of attempt to murder and murder three persons. 
PW6 went to the police. Police showed him photograph 
of the unidentified person found in a hotel room in the 
evening of 9.2.1994. According to police, the accused had 
booked the hotel room on 8.2.1994. He left the hotel in the 
evening keeping the room locked and did not return. 
E 
When the room was opened with duplicate key for 
cleaning on 9.2.1994, dead body of deceased 'N' was 
found. 
In the second incident case, the accused had three 
F 
persons in his net aspiring for better prospects in 
America i.e. PW1, PW5 and the deceased 'J'. PW1 and 
PW5 were husband and brother of the deceased 
respectively. The accused called them to Bombay, 
booked two rooms in his name for them in a hotel. The 
G 
accused received money from the victims for completing 
other formalities. The accused then gave one capsule 
and two tablets each to the three victims and asked them 
to take it before medical checkup. After taking the 
medicine the victims started feeling drowsy and sleeping 
H 
72 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2012] 10 S.C.R. 
A sensation. The deceased went to her room, when PW1 
and PW5 lied down, the accused administered an 
injection in the abdomen of PW1. In the midnight, when 
PW1 and PW5 regained consciousness, they alerted the 
hotel manager and found the deceased dead in her room. 
B 
The trial court convicted the accused u/ss. 420 and 
302 IPC in the first case. In the second case, the trial court 
convicted the accused u/ss. 420, 302, 307, 397, 342 and 
328 IPC. In both the cases, life imprisonment was given 
for the offence u/s. 302 IPC. High Court confirmed the 
C conviction of the accused, but enhanced the sentence 
from life imprisonment to death, in view of the ghastly 
manner, the accused murdered both the accused and 
poisoned PWs 1 and 5 in the second case. He
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.