LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
⚖️ Ask the AI about your situation:🚗 Car Accident💼 Work / Job🏠 Housing / Eviction👪 Family / Divorce📋 Contract Dispute💰 Money Owed

STATE OF U.P. versus NAREN.DRA & ORS.

Citation: [2014] 14 S.C.R. 1354 · Decided: 22-09-2014 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.Y. EQBAL · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
.. _, . [2014] 14 .S.C.R. 1354 , 
STATE OF U.P. 
1 
v. 
NAREN.DRA & ORS, 
,., . (CriminalAppeaiNos.1551-1554.of2008) 
SEPTEMBER 22, 2014 
' ,,\. 
[M. Y. EQBAL AND PIN.AKI CH.ANDRA GHOSE; JJ.] 
•. 
' ' 
Penal Code, 1860: ss.3021149 ~Dispute over land'"' 
Murder- Conviction and death sentence by trial court- High 
C Court converted death sentence to life imprisonment on the 
ground that the case did not fall under rarest of rare case -
Held: In the facts and circumstances of the case and evidence 
adduce.d by the prosecution side," there is no reason to 
interfere with the view of the High Court -
Sentence -
D Commutation of sentence. 
·Dismissing the appeals, the Court 
. HELD: The High Court opined that considering the 
overall circumstances of the case, this case does not 
E fall within the category of rarest of rare case and it cannot 
be said that imprisonment for lesser sentence of life term 
altogether foreclosed. The High Court observed that 
compassion in sentence is also a key factor and it allows 
the scars to heal. Longevity of incarceration may make 
F them see reason. Passage of time may make them 
ponder over the crime they had committed. This might 
arose in them a feeling of remorse and repentance. 
Dismissing the Criminal Reference and partly allowing 
accused persons' appeals, the High Court converted the. 
G death sentence awarded to the accused into· 
imprisonment for life. There is no reason to disagree with . 
the view'. by the High Court in reducing the de~th . '"~ 
sentencEHnto life imprisonment. [Paras 5, 7][1357-C-E, · •b 
-. 
- -. 
• 
, 
-' +1. v .._' -n1 
G-H]· ·. 
c, ·· 
· 
· ·., .'V 
H 
1354 
STATE OF U.P. v. NARENDRA & ORS. 
1355 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal A 
Appeal No(s): 1551-1554 of 2008 
From the Judgment and Order dated 27-05-2005 of 
the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Appeal 
Nos. 2181, 1997, 2027, 2129, 2936, 2903 of 2004 and 
Criminal Reference No. 7 of 2004. 
B 
· Ratnakar Dash, Sr. Adv., Ms .. Pragati Neekhra; Abhisth 
Kumar, Som Raj Choudhury, Advs. for the Appellant. 
Mukesh K. Giri, Ms. Sandhya Goswami, Saryaya 
Krishna, Mahender P.S. Tomar, Jabar Singh, Advs. for the C 
Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
M. Y. EQBAL, J. 1. These appeals by special leave by 
the State are directed against the common judgment and order D 
dated 27'h May, 2005 passed by the High Court of Judicature 
atAllahabad in Criminal Appeal Nos. 2181, 1997, 2027, 2129, 
2936 and 2903 of 2004 and Criminal Reference No. 7 of 2004 
(for confirmation of death sentence of accused Manoj, Sonu, 
Umesh, Tej Pal and Narendra), whereby appeals of accused 
E 
Dinesh and Sheo Pal was allowed acquitting them of the 
charges and appeals of accused Manoj, Sonu, Umesh, Tej 
Pal and Narendra were partly allowed converting their death 
sentence to life imprisonment. 
2. The facts in brief leading to the filing of the present F 
case are that one Pushplata alias Guddy (PW-1) lodged a 
report at Police station Deoband, Saharanpur that there was 
·a dispute and enmity betWeen her husband Dr. Rajveer Singh 
and brother-in-law Rajpal Singh with regard to a land and • 
litigation which was pending in the Court. Due to said enmity, G 
on 3.6.2Q01 at about 7.00AM Manoj, Sonu alias Ajay, Umesh 
and Sunlf armed with cour:itry made pistols and Tej Pal, brother 
in-law" of Son-u, Narendra, son-in-law of Rajpal Singh armed 
with knives came to her house and killed her husband, sons 
Manish and Ashish and her brother Viriod with fire arms and 
H 
1356 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2014] 14 S.C.R.. 
A 
knives. She stated that she along with her mother, brother Amit 
and several other persons witnessed the occurrence. Inspector 
Arnrit Lal (PW-5) reached at the place of occurrence and 
instructed S.I. Azad Singh Chauhan (PW-6) to prepare the 
inquest memos. He prepared the site plan and recorded the 
B statement of informant Pushplata, witnesses Arn it Kurnar;Anar 
D~vi and Ram Singh (PW-2). He also collected the blood 
stained earth, plain earth, bed sheet, plain cement, empty 
cartridges and prepared the recovery memos. After conducting 
the postmortem of the deceased Rajbir, Manish,Ashish and 
. c Vinod on 3.6.2001, Dr. R.R. Gahlot (PW-3), Medical Officer, 
S.B.D. Government Hospital, Saharanpur opined that thedeath 
was caused by shock and haemorrhage as a result of ante 
mortem injuries,~The investigating Officer after obtaining 
permission from District Magistrate, Saharan

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