FRANCIS ALIAS PONNAN versus STATE OF KERALA

Citation: [1975] 1 S.C.R. 485 · Decided: 17-05-1974 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M. HAMEEDULLAH BEG · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

' 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
FRANCIS ALIAS PONNAN 
v. 
STATE OF KERALA 
May 17, 1974 
[M. H. BEG ANDY. V. CHANDRACHUO, JJ.J 
I'cnal Cude-S. 300-A1urder-Scniencc-<lro11//d.1 for reducing. 
485 
ft is not possible for courts to attempt to explore the murky depths of a 
warped ~nd twisted mi!J.d so ·as to discover whether an offender is capable of 
refonnat1on or redemption. and, if so, in what way. This is a subject on which · 
only experts in that line after a thorough study of an individual's case history 
coutd hazard an opinion wit~ any degree of confidence. 
Judicial psycho: 
therapy has its obvious and inherent limitations. 
The mere possession of a 
\varped or twisted mind 1 \vhich many a criminal has, could not either absolve 
him from criminal liability or mitigate his crime. Courts are generally con-
cerned only with the nature and extent of punishment once the accused's guilt 
is established. Jn considering the question of 
appropriate 
sentence to 
be 
awarded, while the common frailities and failings of ordinary human beings_ to 
which the offender gives vent, may, without affecting the criminality of the acts 
punished, be enough to show that a lesser sentence will meet the ends 
of 
justice, abnormal twists of the mind or indications of an obdurate and unrelent-
ing viciou5ness of mind and conduct of the offender may show the need for a 
severer sentence. 
[491D-FJ 
The murdered man had attacked the brother oi' the appellant in Crl. A. 133 
of 1973. Later he had attacked the brother-in-law of the appellant. who was 
so badly injured that he had to remain in hospital for son1e days. 
On the day 
foilowing the day of attack of his brother-in-law, the appellant had attacked 
the murdered man in broad daylight. 
Several witnesses spoke of the deter-
mined manner in which the appellant had told them that he had made up his 
n1ind to kill the deceased. The appellant hid himself in a compound waiting 
fcir tlie deceased and when the deceased was ~oing on his bicycle, the appellant 
chased him and at!acked and killed him with a chopper. 
The High Court convicted and sentenced him to death. 
The appellant in Cr. A. 46 of 1974 was tried jointly for three murders 
comn1itted at different times and places close to each other. In all the three 
cases the victims were beguiled by the appellant on one pretext or another to 
accotnpany him on a journey and the victims did not return after that. 
The 
F 
appellant was convicted and sentenced to death. 
G 
H 
On the question of sentence, 
HELD : ( 1) The provocation contemplated by law must be grave as well 
as sudden so as to deprive the individual of the power of self-control before 
the first exception to section 300 could apply. 
Jn deciding whether the case 
merits a less severe of the two penalties prescribed for murder the history 
of relations between the parties concerned, the background, the context or the 
factual setting of the crime. and the strength and nature of the motives ope-
rating on the I_llind of the offender are ~elc~ant CC!nsideratio~s. _The state of 
feelings and mind produced by these, while insufficient to brt~g in the excep· 
tion, may suffice to make the less severe sentence more appropnate. 
[489D-E] 
In the instant case the motives of the appellant, who in hfs obviously frenzied 
state of mind decided to do away with someone who appeared to him to be 
a standing m~nace to the lives and limbs of his near and dear ones could not 
be said to be reprehensible. Nor could his inflamed feelings be less worthy of 
consideration in pronouncing upon the question of _sentence. 
[489F-GJ 
It is not enough for deciding such a question to find that facts of the case 
indicated deliberation or pre-meditation before the offence, although this is quite 
486 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[ 197 5] 1 s.c.R, 
important. Even the period of time which had elapsed between the two inci-
dents. was. not so lengthy as to enable the court to say that the effect of pro-
vocation given by the prev:ous ni~hc's occurrence, in the background of another 
similar occurrence, and the feelings of fear or alarm whic,h must have en-
gendered, so as to disturb the mind of a person in the position of the appellant, 
n1usi have evaporated before the murder was committed. These may h.._ve 
become even intensified by broodin~ over or talking and thinking· about the 
ini..:idents. 
Allhough the previous incidents could not constitute sufficient provo-
cation to redu:e the. c;ime of murdo.;1 '.o one of 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.