MACHHL SINGH AND OTHERS versus STATE OF PUNJAB

Citation: [1983] 3 S.C.R. 413 · Decided: 20-07-1983 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. MURTAZA FAZAL ALI · Disposal: Disposed off

Cited by 29 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

t 
· MACHHl SINGH AND OTHERS 
v. 
STATE OF PUNJAB 
July 20, 1983 
[S. MURTAZA FAZAL ALI, A. VARADARAJAN 
.AND M. P. THAKKAR, JJ.] 
" 
413 
Penal Code (Act 45 of 1860), Section 302-Sentence-ln1position of death 
sentence-ccRarest of ~are casesformula"-Guidelines to be adopted in identi-
fication of rarest of rare cases, explained-Evidence Act (Act 1 of 1_872) Section 
9-Witnesses indentifying culprits in the light shed by lantern-A}Jpreciation of-_ 
Dying declaration, non-recording of-Evidenti'ary value-'-Doctrine of benefit of 
doubt, when to be invoked. 
A feud between two fan1ilies has resulted in tragic consequences. 
Seventeen lives were lost in the course of a series of five incidents which 
· occurred in quick succession in five different villages, situated in the vicinity of 
each other, in Punjab, on the night between August 12 and August 13, 1977. The 
seventeen perSons who Jost their lives and the three who substained injuries 
included men, women and children related to one Amar Singh and his Sister 
Piaro Bai. 
In this connection one Mach hi Singh and his eleven companions, close 
relatives and associates were prosecuted in five sessions cases, each pertaining 
to the concerned village in which the killii;igs -took place. Machhi Singh was 
the common accused. at each trial. The composition of his co-accused~differed 
number-wise and identity-wise from trial to trial At the conclusion of the series 
of trials, the accused found guilty were convicted under appropriate provisions. 
Four of them were awarded death sentence; whereas sentence of in1prisonment 
for life was imposed on nine of them. They were also convicted for different 
offences and appropriate punishment was inflicted on each of them in that 
behalf. The ordCr of.conviction and sentence gave rise to five murder references 
and fourteen appeals by the convicts before the High Court of Punjab and 
Haryana. Having lost their appeals and the death sentences having been con-
firmed, the appellants have come in appeal by way of special leave. 
The Court considered the following: 
(a) What normal guidelines are to be followed so as to identify the 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
••rarest of rare cases~' formula for imposing death sentence, as spelled out in 
ff 
Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab, [1980] 2 SCR 864; (b) Reliability of eye wit-
nesses to a crime under ~ight shed by the lantern in a village to identify connect 
~n accused to the crime; (c) invocatiori of the doctrine of benefit of doubt; 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(i9$3) 3 s.c.R. 
and (d) the effect of non-suminoning the magistrate for recording dying 
A 
declaration. 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
AiloWing the Crim.inal Appeals Nos. 79/81 and 86/81 and dismissing 
the. other appeals, the Court 
HELD : 1:1. The extreme penalty of death need not be intlicted except 
in gravest cases of extreme culpability. Before opting for the death penalty the 
circumstances of the 'offender' also require to be taken into consideration 
alongwith the circun1stances of the •crime'. Life imprisomr.nt is the rule and. 
death sentencc·is an exception. In other woi'ds death sentence must be imposed 
only when life imprisonment appears to be an altogether inadequ~te punish-
ment having regard to the relevant circumstanc~s of the crime, and provided, 
and only provided, the option to)mpose ·sentence of imprisonrnent for life 
cannot be conscientiously exercised· having regard to the nature and circum- · 
!::tances of the crin1e and all the relev3.nt circurnsjanCes. A balance sheet of 
aggravating and mitigating circumstances 11as to be drawn up and in doing so 
the mitigating circun1stances has to be accorded full weightage and a just 
balance has to be struck between the aggravating and the mitigating circum-
stances before the option is exercised. [433 A-E] 
Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab [1980] 2 S.C.C. 684, reiicd on, 
1;2. In order to apply these guidelines inter-alia the following 
questions may be asked and answeres: (a) rs_there. something uncommon 
about the crime which renders sentence of imprisonment for life inadequate 
and called for a death sentence? (b) Are the circumstances of tile crime such 
that there is no alternative but to impose death sentence even after according 
maximum weightage to the mitigating circufnstances which speak in favour 
of the offender. [433 E-0] 
J 
1 :3. If upon taking an overall global view of all the circumstances in 
the light of the aforesaid proposition and taking into ,account the ans

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