RONNY@RONALD JAMES ALWARIS ETC. versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Citation: [1998] 2 S.C.R. 162 · Decided: 05-03-1998 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.K. MUKHERJEE · Disposal: Case Partly allowed
Cited by 4 judgment(s) · cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
RONNY@RONALD JAMES ALWARIS ETC. 
v. 
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA 
MARCH 5, 1998 
B 
[M.K. MUKHERJEE AND S.S.M. QUADRI, JJ,] 
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. 
Criminal Trial-Test Identification Parade (TIP)-Witness not 
C participating in T!P-ldentifYing accused for the first time in Court-
Identification challenged-Held, if a witness has known an accused earlier 
then absence of corroborative evidence by way of test identification parade 
would not be material-Under the facts and circumstances, testimony of such 
witnesses reliable-Indian Evidence Act-Section 9. 
D 
E 
Sections 100(4) and (5)-Search and Recovery of Articles-Witness to 
search not from the locality-Witness was driver of investigating team-
Evid~nce of witness challenged-Held, if there is intrinsic merit in the evidence, 
it cannot be rejected solely on the ground that witness is not from the locality 
of search or has been brought by the police. 
Indian Evidence Act-Section //4(a)- Robbery and murder-Articles 
belonging to deceased persons rer;overed from the possession of accused 
persons-Recovery without delay-Possession of articles unexplained-
Ejfect-Held, presumption would be attracted against the accused persons 
F that they had committed the offence. 
Indian Penal Code-Section 376-!njury on the private parts of 
deceased mentioned in post-mortem report-Opinion about sexual assault 
not mentioned in the report-Doctor making statement about sexual assault 
in court-Testimony challenged-Strong circumstantial evidence suggesting 
G sexual assault-Held, testimony of doctor based on injuries noted in post-
mortem certificate cannot be brushed aside. 
Section 354(3)-Death Sentence-Special Reasons-Held, whether the 
case is rarest of the rare has to be determined on the facts of each case-
H Factors constituting rarest of rare case stated-Case based on circumstantial 
162 
. 
~·· 
RONNY @RONALD JAMES ALW ARIS v. STATE OF MHARASHTRA 
163 
evidence-Not possible to ascertain role of which accused is more culpable A 
in degree-Under the facts and circumstances, capital punishment commuted 
into life imprisonment. 
Appellants, A-1, A-2 and A-3, were charged for the commission on the 
night of 20th July, 1992 of offence of murder under Section 302 read with 
B 
Section 34, IPC of three members, M, Rand 0, of a family; offence of rape 
<( 
of R under Section 376 IPC, besides some other offences. It was alleged that 
~ 
the appellants were allowed inside the house of the deceased persons for 
staying on 20th July, 1992 night as one of the appellants was close relative 
of the deceased persons. PWs-29 alld 34, friends of R, were present in the 
house wbn tht appellants came and they were introdm:ed by R to the c 
appellaets Appellants left the bo~ In the morning of the next day in the 
Maruti Car of the deceased persons which.was witnessed by PWs-22, 24 and 
26. Since the night of 20th July, the deceased persons did not come out of 
the house and were not seen on 21st and 22nd July by persons who ought 
to have seen them. The deceased persons did not go to the Hospital where D 
~· 
mother of R was undergoing treatment and where they were going daily. All 
the doors of the house were locked and the lights were also on during these 
two days. When the relatives of the deceased persons came to enquire about 
them and found the house locked, they requested the watchman to look into 
the house; he found their dead bodies in the bathroom. On breaking open the 
E 
door, the house was found rensacked and the bedsheet contained stains of 
blood and seman. Post-mortem was conducted on 23rd July, 1972 at 10 :30 
A.M. and the report indicated that death may have taken place between 24 
and 72 hours earlier. The report also indicated injuries on the private parts 
of R. The appellants were arrested by the police and from their possession 
,,t 
and also at their instance, articles belonging to the deceased persons were F 
recovered which included amongst others the Maruti car key and the key of 
the main door of the house of the deceased persons. The Maruti car found 
:::i 
abandoned contained the finger prints of A-2 according to the finger print 
expert 
Trial Court found the appellants guilty on the basis of circumstantial G 
;... 
evidence since their were no eye-witnesses to the occurrence and convicted 
them tmder Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC, Section 376(2)(g) WC, 
besides under some other sections and sentenced them to death and referred 
the case for confirmation
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.