LexSONU SARDAR versus STATE OF CHHATISGARH
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2012] 3 S.C.R. 558 SONU SARDAR v. STATE OF CHHATISGARH (Criminal Appeal Nos. 1333-1334 of 2010) FEBRUARY 23, 2012 [A.K PATNAIK AND SWATANTER KUMAR, JJ.) Penal Code, 1860 - s. 396 - Conviction and sentence under - Commission of dacoity at the house of the deceased C and murder of five persons including two minor children with knife, rod and axe by the appellant and four others - Appellant convicted uls. 396 and sentenced to death by the courts below - Sustainability of - Held: Prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant participated in the offence D of dacoity and murder - Conviction of the appellant based not only on the oral testimony of the daughter of the deceased but also on the evidence of other prosecution witnesses, seized articles and the forensic report - Clear and definite evidence to show that the appellant not only participated in E the crime but also played the lead role in the commission of offence - Five members of a family including two minor children and driver were ruthlessly killed by use of a knife, an axe and an iron rod and with help of four others - Crime was obviously committed after pre-meditation with absolutely no F . consideration for human lives, and for money - Even though appellant was young, his criminal propensities are beyond reform and he is a menace to society - Thus, courts below rightly held that this is one of those rarest of rare cases in which death sentence is appropriate punishment - Order of conviction of the appellant as well as sentence of death G sustained. According to the prosecution, appellant, 'A' and others committed dacoity in the house of 'S' and thereafter, committed murder of 'S', his driver, his wife · H 558 SONU SARDAR v. STATE OF CHHATISGARH 559 and his two minor children with rod, knife and axe. The A appellant and the other co-accused went to the house of 'S' and demanded money from 'S'. One of them bolted the door from inside, two others caught hold of the driver and one of them caught hold of 'S'. They kept knife on the neck of 'S' and compelled him to give cash. Daughter B of 'S' (PW 1), managed to escape and went to the house of 'R' (PW-2) and narrated about the incident to him. FIR was lodged. The appellant and his co-accused 'A' and 'C' were arrested. On the basis of the statement of the appellant, blood stained clothes of the app~llant, axe, c knife and rod were seized. Test identification parade was carried out in which PW 1 identified the appellant and 'A'. PW 1, PW 2, PW 3 and PW 4 and other witnesses .were examined. The trial court convicted the appellant under Section 396 IPC and imposed sentence of death. The 0 High Court upheld the order. Therefore, the appellant filed the instant appeals. Dismissing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1. During investigation a Test Identification E Parade was carried out and out of the ten persons who were presented, the appellant and 'A' were identified by PW 1-'SH' as the two persons, who were amongst the five persons who had come to the house of 'S' and were demanding money from him. From the evidence of PW F 2-'R' as well as the evidence of PW 4-'D' it is found that PW-1, soon after she escaped from the house of 'S', mentioned that one of the five persons who had gone to the house of 'S' was a sardar. In her cross-examination, PW-1 stated that she knew the appellant as he had come G to their house for selling scrap. Moreover, the broken axe with broken handle and iron rod were recovered pursuant to the statement of the appellant. PW 36-doctor, after narrating the injuries on the dead bodies of 'S', 'AG', 'R', 'Y' and 'KR', opined that the death was on account H 560 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2012] 3 S.C.R. A of shock as a result of fatal injuries. The injuries described by them were not only incised wounds but multiple fractures of temporal and parietal bones and on the head which could have been caused by the axe and the iron rod. The report of the Forensic Science Laboratory B confirmed the presence of human blood on the clothes of the deceased persons, axe and iron rod as well as the turban and T-shirt of the appellant which had been seized. Thus, the conviction of the appellant was not only based on the oral testimony of PW-1, but also the c evidence of PW-2, PW-3, PW-4, PW-36, the seized articles and also the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory. It is further established from the evide
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.