MANOHAR LAL @ MUNNA AND ANR. versus THE STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI)

Citation: [1999] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 506 · Decided: 17-12-1999 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.T. THOMAS · Disposal: Case Partly allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

., ., 
A 
MANOHAR LAL @ MUNNA AND ANR. 
v. 
THE STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI) 
DECEMBER 17, 1999 
B 
[K.T. THOMAS AND D.P. MOHAPATRA, JJ.] 
Penal Code, 1860 : 
Sections 302, 396 and 149-Death Sentence-Persons set ablaze in 
C mob fury-Temporary frenzy-No systematic or organised activity-No special 
or personal animosity of accused persons towards deceased individually--
Held, under the facts and circumstances death sentence altered to life 
imprisonment. 
Criminal Trial-Eye witness-Details of occurrence not divulged in 
D . statement to police by mother-Horrendous episode-sons were set ablaze 
· before mother in mob fury-Mothe': not having retained mental equanimity-
Held, cryptic statement of mother cannot be used to discredit the testimony 
of the most natural eye-witness. 
Appellants-accused were tried and convicted for offence under Sections 
E 302 and 396 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code by the Trial 
Court for murdering four Sikh brothers by setting them ablaze in the riots 
that took place following the assassination of the then Prime minister Smt. 
Indira Gandhi. Trial Court accepted the testimony of mother, PW-1 and her 
daughter-in-law, PW-2 who were eye-witnesses to the incident and finding 
F the case to be one of the "rarest of rare cases", imposed death penalty on 
the appellants which was confirmed by a Division Bench of the High Court. 
Against the judgement of the Division Bench, appellants have filed the present 
appeals. 
The appellants contended that PW-1 was not a reliable witness and 
G alternatively, that it was not a 'ra_rest of the rare' case to warrant death 
sentence. 
Partly allowing the appeals, the Court 
HELD: 1. PW-1 had stated in the affidavit signed by her and marked 
as exhibit in the trial cour~ that the marauders killed even S, her daughter-
H 
5M 
... 
.. 
MANOHARLALv. STATE (N.C.T.OFDELHI) 
507 
' 
..... 
A 
in-law by burning her. In fact S was not attacked by the killers. She is alive 
even now. Evidently that part of the affidavit is wrong. It is also stated in the 
affidavit that she recognised the appellants among the killers who dragged 
her sons out and set them ablaze. She did not know what all was written 
therein. Neither the person who drafted the affidavit nor the typist who typed 
it has been examined as witness. The testimony of PW-1 mother cannot be B 
rejected merely on the strength of the aforesaid wrong information having 
crept in the affidavit. On the other hand the affidavit gives an assurance that 
appellants were involved in the killing of her sons. [509-H; 510-A, B, C, D] 
2. A reading of the statement of PW-1 to the police makes the position 
clear that the police officer was not then inclined to elicit from the bereaved c 
mother any details of the horrendous episode. He felt that she was then not 
in a mood to speak out the details as the interval of time was not sufficient 
... 
enough for a mother like her to regain mental equanimity. It would be unfair 
and uncharitable to her if that cryptic statement is used to discredit the 
valuable testimony of the most natural eye witness of this horrendous crime. 
[510-E, F] D 
3. The normal sentence for murder is life imprisonment and death 
penalty is now reserved to be given in "rarest of the rare cases" in which 
the other sentence is unquestionably foreclosed. Thus death penalty is now 
sequestered to the narrowest margin. What the appellants have done were E 
no doubt acts of the most gruesome nature. But it is to be borne in mind that 
they were on a rampage, and they ran berserk unguided by sense or reason 
and triggered only by a demented psyche. They had no special or personal 
animosity towards anyone of the deceased individually. The assassination of 
the then Prime Minister Smt. Indira Gandhi had blind folded those youths 
and unfortunately there was no leadership to bridle the mob frenzy unleashed F 
with all cruelty. Hence, the death sentence is altered to imprisonment for 
life. [510-G, H; 511-A-E] 
Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab, [1980] 2 SCC 684, followed. 
Kishori Lal v. State of Delhi, (1999) 1 SCC 148, relied on. 
G 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal Nos. 
,. 
630-631 of 1999. 
• 
From the Judgment and Order dated 16. l 0.1998 of the High Court of 
_, 
Delhi in Criminal Appeal No. 34 of 1998, Criminal Appeal No.12 of 1998 with H 
508 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1999] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 
A Murder Reference No. 1/98. 
B 
M. Qamaruddin, Amber Qamaruddin, Mrs. M. Qamaruddin an
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.