LexKANHAIYA LAL & ORS. versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2013] 6 S.C.R. 361 KANHAIYA LAL & ORS. v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN (Criminal Appeal No. 1108 of 2006) APRIL 22, 2013 [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND DIPAK MISRA, JJ.] A B Penal Code, 1860 - ss. 302, 460, 148, 427 and 342 - Murder - By unlawful assembly with a common object - Conviction - Conversion of death sentence into life C imprisonment by High Court - Sustainability - Held: The crime took place because the village Sarpanch suspected that the deceased persons were responsible for killing his son - All accused persons have almost spent thirteen years in custody - Similarly placed persons have been imposed life sentence D - Regard being had to the totality of the circumstances, it cannot be said that imprisonment for life was inadequate and the circumstances so grave that it calls for a death sentence - Not a case which can be treated to be a case of extreme culpability and there is no other option but to impose death E penalty - No error in the decision of High Court by which it commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment - Sentence I Sentencing. Penal Code, 1860 - ss. 302, 460, 148, 427 and 342 - Murder case - Appeal against conviction of some accused by F trial court- Acquittal by High Court - Propriety - Held: On facts, approach of the High Court cannot be said to be totally implausible - It took note of the involvement of number of persons and, after filtering the grain from the chaff and on due consideration of the material on record, extended the benefit G of doubt to the accused persons who have been acquitted - Conclusions arrived at by the High Court in recording the acquittal justified. 361 H 362 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013] 6 S.C.R. A FIR - Delay in lodging - Effect - Held: Mere delay in lodging FIR cannot be regarded by itself as fatal to the case of the prosecution - Whether the delay creates a dent in the prosecution story and ushers in suspicion has to be gathered by scru(inizing the explanation offered for the delay in light of B the totality of the facts and circumstances - On facts, the explanation offered for delay was not implausible. Witnesses - Related witness - Appreciation - Murder case - Held: In the case at hand, the witnesses lost their father, husband and a relative - The witnesses mentioned about the C weapons used, the assault made and the parts of the body where injuries were inflicted - Nothing on record to discard their testimony as untrustworthy. Appeal - Appeal against conviction and appeal against D acquittal - Distinction between - Discussed. Five persons of the same village were done to death by inflicting blows with swords, gandasis and sticks. The incident allegedly had its genesis in a prior incident E where son of 'RN', Sarpanch of the village, was murdered an<! 'RN' nurtured deep rooted suspicion that the deceased persons were involved in that murder and thus, wanted to take revenge. 'RN' expired during pendency of the trial and, F accordingly, the trial was closed against him. 17 persons were convicted out of which six accused persons, namely, Yuvraj, Hemraj, Hansraj, Radhey Shyam, Modu Nath and Mohan Lal were convicted under Sections 148, 427, 342, 460 and 302 IPC and sentenced to death and G the rest 11 accused, namely, Lal Chand, Dhanpal, Kanyaiyalal, Naval, Revdi Lal, Ram Lal, Babu Lal, Mangi Lal, Ghanshyam, Radhey Shyam S/o Prahalad, and Radhey Shyam s/o Shankar Lal, were convicted under Sections 148, 427, 342, 460 and 302/149 IPC and H $entenced to life imprisonment by the trial court. The rest KANHAIYA LAL & ORS. v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN 363 of the accused persons were acquitted of the charges. A The Division Bench of the High Court partly allowed the appeals preferred by Mohan Lal and others, who were convicted under Sections 302 and 460 IPC and sentenced to death, acquitting Mohan Lal of the charges framed against him under Sections 302 and 460 IPC and as far as the other accused persons of the same category were concerned, the sentence of death was converted to B life sentence and, resultantly, the death reference was declined. The accused persons, namely, Lal Chand, Revdi, Ghanshyam, Radhey Shyam, Mangilal and Babula! C were given benefit of doubt and acquitted of the charges framed against them under Sections 302 and 460 IPC. As far as the other accused persons, namely, Kanhaiyalal, Naval, Ram Lal and Radhey Shyam, s/o Shankar Lal, are concerned, the conviction and sentence imp
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.