LexRAVJI @ RAM CHANDRA versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
, . . RA VJI @ RAM CHANDRA v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN DECEMBER 5, 1995 (G.N. RAY AND G.T. NANAVATI, JJ.] Indian Penal Code, 1860 : Sections 302 and 307. A B Death Penalty-Accused committing five murders including that of his pregnant wife and three minor children while the victims were sleeping-At- C tempt to murder two persons-Commission of crime established beyond doubt-Relevancy of motive-Crime omitted in a cruel and brutal manner with a conscious state of mind-No sign of remorse-Award of death penal- ty-Held justified. The appellant was prosecuted for committing five murders and D attempt to murder two persons. The prosecution case was that he killed his wife, who was in advanced stage of pregnancy, and three minor children with an axe while they were sleeping. From the deposition of the appellant's mother, who later turned hostile, it transpired that at the time of commis· sion of crime the accused, the deceased wife, the minor children and the E appellant's mother were present at home and no other person was present. When the appellant's mother tried to prevent the appellant from commit· ting the crime he caused injuries to her in an attempt to kill her by the same axe. Thereafter he went to an adjacent house and attempted to murder his neighbour's wife Smt. 'G', who also was asleep, with the same axe. The appellant was then fleeing away but the father-in-law of Smt. 'G' F came on bis way and in an attempt to escape from the place, be mercilessly murdered the old man by giving him a number of axe blows. There were eye witnesses who had seen the accused attacking Smt. 'G' and also murdering her father-in-law and when the son of the latter tried to ap· prebend the accuse<\ he fled away from the scene of occurrence. After G appellant's ar~est recovery of blood stained vest of the accused and the axe was also made at his instance. Relying on the evidence of the witness including the injured witnesses the trial court held that the prosecution had established beyond rea.sonable doubt that the accused was guilty of the offences charged. H 195 196 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. A Further taking into account the fact that murders were committed in a brutal end barbaric manner, the trial court imposed death penalty on the appellant which was affirmed by the High Court. B In appeal to this Court, counsel for the appellant, confining his submissions on the question of sentence contender! that (i) though the evidence do not reveal that the appellant was insane at the time of commission of crime yet in the absence of any evidence suggesting har· bouring of hatred, grudge or ill feeling against his wife or neighbour's wife the sudden spree of murderous assault only suggests that he must have been seized of psychic disorder momentarily; this sudden inexplicable C psychic disorder is an important mitigating factor in awarding the extreme penalty of death; (ii) even if this Court accepts the concurrent finding of the courts below that appellant was guilty of the offences charged the absence of motive requires to be considered for sustaining the death penalty. D Justifying for the death sentence imposed on the appellant it was . contended for the State that (i) when by clear, clinching and reliable evidence the prosecution has established the guilt of the accused it is immaterial that the motive has not been proved; (ii) there is not an iota of evidence regarding sudden psychic disorder of the accused-appellant at E the time of commission of the crime. Rather the evidence reveals that in a cool and calculated manner and without any provocation whatsoever the appellant committed murders one after the other and that too in a very brutal and ghastly manner; and (iii) the appellant was not remorseful even after the incident as he did not attend the funeral of his wife and minor F children nor did he go to the hospital to see her ailing mother. Dismissing the Appeal, this Court HELD : 1. The commission of crimes by the appellant has been clearly established beyond reasonable doubt. The evidences adduced in G this case are so clear that the courts below had no difficulty in holding that the appellant was guilty of murdering his wife and three minor children and injuring his own mother in an attempt to kill her. Such finding has been made on the basis of the reliable and clinching evidence adduced in the case and there is no reason to take a contrary vie
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.