OM PRAKASH versus STATE OF HARYANA

Citation: [1999] 1 S.C.R. 794 · Decided: 22-02-1999 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.T. THOMAS · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
OM PRAKASH 
;l 
v. 
STATE OF HARYANA 
r 
FEBRUARY 22, 1999 
B 
(K.T. THOMAS AND M.B. SHAH, JJ.] 
t 
' 
·-
Oiminal Law : 
.. -
Penal Code, 1860 : Section 302. 
c 
Gmesome mu"rde,.._!'Rarest of rare' cases-Death sentenc.e ot imprison-
ment for life-Adequacy of-Mental state of accusedt-Consideration of-f'er-
sistent disputes over a small house between two neighbours led to the 
gmesome murder of seven persons-Murder committed with pre-meditation 
and in a well-thought out manner-Accused was mentally disturbed due to 
D constant harassment and humiliation of his f amity members by the deceased 
. 
' 
persons who were rich and influential-No protection given to accused despite 
repeated written prayers-Accused aged 23, was a disciplined member of 
... 
paramilitary force and had no criminal dntecedents-Held, court must 
balance the mitigating and aggravating circumstances of the crime before 
E imposing sentence-Under these circumstances, the case cannot be treated as 
one of the 'rarest 
of rare' cases-Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S. 
354(3)-Criminal Trial. 
The appellant-accused was convicted. by the trial court for an offence 
under Section 302 of the Penal Code, 18.60 and sentenced to death. The 
F High Court confirmed the conviction anft sentence. Hence this appeal. 
According to the prosecution, persistent disputes over a small house 
( 
in a village between two neighbours led to the gruesome murder of seven 
persons. The murders were committed by the accused, a member of the 
G Border Security Force, with pre-meditation and in a well thought out 
manner. 
On behalf of the appellant-accused it was contended that accused 
was in a state of extreme mental disturbance caused by constant harass-
ment and humiliation of his family members by the deceased persons who 
H were rich and influential; that despite repeated written prayers accused 
794 
.. 
-· 
" 
... 
' 
)' 
-~ 
OM PRAKASH v. STATE 
795 
did not get the protection from the concerned authorities; that the accused A 
aged 23 was a disciplined member of paramilitary force, at the relevant 
time and had no criminal antecedents; that this case was not one of the 
"rarest of rare" cases and, therefore, sentence of imprisonment for life 
would be adequate to meet the ends of justice. 
Allowing the appeal, this Court 
B 
HELD : 1. It is true that court must respond to the cry of the society 
and to settle what would be deterrent punishment for abominable crime. 
It is equally true that a large number of criminals go unpunished thereby 
increasing criminals in the society and law losing its deterrent effect. It is c 
also true that the exaggerated adherence to and insistence upon the 
establishment of proof beyond every reasonable doubt, by the prosecution, 
ignoring the ground realities, the 
fact-situation and the peculiar cir-
cumstances of a given case often results in miscarriage of justice and 
makes the justice delivery system a suspect; in the ultimate analysis the D 
society suffers and a criminal gets encouraged. Sometimes it is stated that 
the only rights of the criminals are kept in mind, the victims are forgotten . 
Despite this it should be kept in mind that while imposing the 'rarest of 
rare' punishment, i.e. death penalty, the Court must balance the mitigating 
and aggravating circumstances of the crime and it would depend upon 
particular and peculiar facts and circumstances of each case. (801-B-D] 
E 
Suraj Bhan v. State of Rajasthan, (1996] SCC Criminal 1314; State of 
M.P. v. Shyamsunder Trivedi, (1995] 4 SCC 262; Shankar v. State of Tamil 
Nadu, (1994] 4 SCC 478 and Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab, (1980] 2 SCC 
684, relied on. 
F 
2. In this case it appears from the application to the authorities that 
the accused was all throughout feeling that he and his family members 
were humiliated by the other party who were rich and influential and who 
were intending to grab the plot/Ghar belonging to them. The applications G 
also reveal that for a period of more than three months the appellant was 
requesting the authorities to take action so that he and his family members 
can live in peace. It was his allegation that the SHO of the Police Station 
was conniving with the other side and had demanded five thousand rupees 
as ransom, which their family m.embers were unable to pay, therefore, no 
action, was taken against the other party. (806-H; 807-A-D] 
H 
796 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1999) 1 S.C.R. 
A 
3. One has to consider whether the case of 

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