LexSUDAM @ RAHUL KANIRAM JADHAV versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2011] 6 S.C.R. 1104 A SUDAM @ RAHUL KANIRAM JADHAV v. ' STATE OF MAHARASHTRA (Criminal Appeal Nos. 185-186 of 2011) B JULY 4, 2011 [HARJIT SINGH BEDI AND CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860: ss.302, 201 - Homicidal death - c Death due to strangulation - Five deceased - Conviction based on circumstantial evidence - Appellant-accused living with the deceased woman as husband and wife, along with four children, two from her first husband and two from the appellant - By projecting himself to be single, appellant married D another woman (PW-6) - When deceased woman discovered the illicit relationship of appellant and PW-6, she agreed to pay Rs.15000 to PW-6 to leave appellant - Appellant, thereafter, came back with the deceased woman and children to his village - After two days, the dead bodies of the E deceased woman and children found in the village pond - Relying on circumstantial evidence, trial court convicted the appellant ulss.302 and 201 and awarded death sentence - High Court confirmed conviction and death sentence - On appeal, held: All the deceased met homicidal death - The F evidence of mother of deceased and PW. 6 showed that deceased and four children were last seen alive with the appellant two days prior to recovery of dead bodies - Appellant had also made extra-judicial confession before PW. 6 that he committed murder on account of the G harassment meted out to him by his wife - The circumstances led to one and the only conclusion that the appellant had committed the murder of all the five persons - Accordingly conviction of appellant upheld - As regards sentence, the appellant killed the woman with whom he lived as husband H 1104 SUDAM @ RAH UL KANIRAM JADHAV v. STATE OF 1105 MAHARASHTRA and wife, a woman who was in deep love with him and willing A to pay Rs.15,0001- to PW.6 to save the relationship - The manner in which the crime was committed clearly showed it to be premeditated and well planned - He not only killed the deceased but crushed her head to avoid identification - Killing four children, tying the dead bodies in bundles of two each B and throwing them in the Pond would not have been possible, had the appellant not meticulously planned the murders - It showed that the crime was committed in a beastly, extremely brutal, barbaric and grotesque manner - The offence resulted into intense and extreme indignation of the community and c shocked the collective conscience of the society - The case in hand fell in the category of the rarest of the rare cases and the trial courl did not err in awarding the death sentence and the High court in confirming the same - Sentence/ Sentencing. Evidence: Circumstantial evidence - Held: To bring home the guilt on the basis of the circumstantial evidence, the prosecution has to establish that the circumstances proved lead to one and the only conclusion towards the guilt D of the accused - In a case based on circumstantial evidence, E the circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn are to be cogently and firmly established - The circumstances so proved must unerringly point towards the guilt of the accused - It should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that the crime was F committed by the accused and none else - It has to be considered within all human probability and not in fanciful manner - In order to sustain conviction, circumstantial evidence must be complete and must point towards the guilt of the accused - Such evidence should not only be consistent G with the guilt of the accused but inconsistent with his innocence. The prosecution case was that the victim (deceased- woman) was living with the appellant as his wife. The H 1106 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 6 S.C.R. A deceased-woman had two children from her first marriage and two childre·n from her marriage to the appellant. The deceased-woman came to know about the illicit relationship of the appellant with PW-6. Thereafter, the appellant, PW-6 and the deceased-woman had B serious dispute over the issue. The appellant orally agreed to divorce Pw-6 and pay Rs. 15,000/- to her. The said amount was agreed to be paid by deceased-woman. Thereafter, PW-6 went back to her village. The deceased- woman and her children came back with the appellant. c After two days, the dead body of the deceased-woman and her four children were found floating in the village p
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.