LexRABBU @ SARVESH versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2024] 10 S.C.R. 37 : 2024 INSC 720 Rabbu @ Sarvesh v. The State of Madhya Pradesh (Criminal Appeal No(s). 449-450 of 2019) 12 September 2024 [B.R. Gavai,* Prashant Kumar Mishra and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ.] Issue for Consideration The appellant was convicted for offences punishable u/ss. 450, 376(2)(i), 376D, 376A and 302 r/w. s.34 of IPC and s.5(g)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) awarding death penalty u/ss. 376A and 302 IPC and life imprisonment u/s. 376D of the IPC and rigorous imprisonment for 10 years u/s. 450 of the IPC. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – ss.450, 376(2)(i), 376D, 376A and 302 r/w. s. 34 – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – s.5(g)/6 – Appellant contended that the instant case rested on the three dying declarations and a DNA report – The Dying declarations were inconsistent and DNA report pointed presence of a third person – It was also contended that it was not ‘rarest of the rare’ case: Held: On perusal of the materials on record, it is found that the dying declaration recorded by the Executive Magistrate (Naib Tehsildar), PW-11, which was endorsed by PW-9- doctor is reliable and trustworthy – The dying declaration recorded by PW-11 is in question-answer form – In the said dying declaration, the deceased clearly implicates the present appellant – The Medical Officer, PW-9, before the commencement of the dying declaration has given an endorsement regarding fit mental status of the deceased to make a declaration and at the end of the dying declaration again he has endorsed that the deceased was in a fit state of mind – The written dying declaration is corroborated by the oral dying declaration as has come on record in the evidence of her grand-father (PW-1), her grand-father’s brother (PW-2), her aunt (PW-13) and her uncle (PW-14) – In the said dying declaration, all the witnesses have clearly stated that the deceased after coming * Author 38 [2024] 10 S.C.R. Digital Supreme Court Reports out from the room in flames has narrated the incident about the appellant committing the crime – The statement of the deceased recorded u/s.164 of Cr.P.C. also supports the prosecution case – There is no error in the conviction of the appellant – As far as the question whether the present case falls under the category of ‘rarest of rare case’ is concerned, in the present case, it is to be noted that the appellant comes from a socio-economic backward stratum of the society – He lost his mother and brother at the tender age – The appellant and his family members do not have any criminal background – The appellant was of a tender age of 22 years when the aforesaid incident occurred – It cannot be said that the appellant is a hardened criminal, who cannot be reformed – The possibility of the appellant, if given the chance of being reformed, cannot be ruled out – In view of the matter, the confirmation of the death penalty would not be justified – In facts and circumstances of the case, the death penalty needs to be commuted to fixed imprisonment without remission for a period of 20 years. [Paras 7, 8, 15, 16, 18] Case Law Cited Shivu and Another v. Registrar General, High Court of Karnataka and Another [2007] 2 SCR 555 : (2007) 4 SCC 713 : (2007) INSC 136; Purushottam Dashrath Borate and Another v. State of Maharashtra [2015] 5 SCR 1112 : (2015) 6 SCC 652 : (2015) INSC 392; Deepak Rai v. State of Bihar [2013] 14 SCR 297 : (2013) 10 SCC 421 : (2013) INSC 638; Swamy Shraddananda (2) alias Murali Manohar Mishra v. State of Karnataka [2008] 11 SCR 93 : (2008) 13 SCC 767 : (2008) INSC 853; Shankar Kisanrao Khade v. State of Maharasthra [2013] 6 SCR 949 : (2013) 5 SCC 546 : (2013) INSC 281; Gandi Doddabasappa alias Gandhi Basavaraj v. State of Karnataka [2017] 2 SCR 62 : (2017) 5 SCC 415; Prakash Dhawal Khairnar (Patil) v. State of Maharashtra [2001] Supp. 5 SCR 612 : (2002) 2 SCC 35 : 2001 INSC 606; Mohinder Singh v. State of Punjab [2013] 3 SCR 90 : (2013) 3 SCC 294 : (2013) INSC 61; Madan v. State of Uttar Pradesh [2023] 16 SCR 765 : (2023) SCC OnLine SC 1473; Navas @ Mulanavas v. State of Kerala [2024] 3 SCR 913 : (2024) SCC OnLine SC 315 : 2024 INSC 215 – referred to. List of Acts Penal Code, 1860; Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. [2024] 10 S.C.R. 39 Rabbu @ Sarvesh v. The State of Madhya Pradesh List of Keywords Section 450 of IPC; Section 376(2)(i) of IPC; Section 376D of IP
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.