VASANTA SAMPAT DUPARE versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Citation: [2017] 3 S.C.R. 850 · Decided: 03-05-2017 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DIPAK MISRA · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 7 judgment(s) · cites 9 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2017] 3 S.C.R. 850 
VASANTA SAMPAT DUPARE 
v. 
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA 
(Review Petition (Crl.) Nos. 637-638 of 2015) 
In 
(Criminal Appeal Nos. 2486-2487 of 2014) 
MAY03,2017 
[DIPAK MISRA, R. F. NARIMAN AND 
UDAY UMESH LALIT, JJ.] 
C 
Sentence/Sentencing: 
Death sentence - Conviction .of review petitioners for rape 
and murder of a minor girl of 4 years and award of death sentence 
- Held: In the judgment under review, this Court had considered 
the aggravating facts and the mitigating circumstances - The 
D brutality and diabolical nature of the crime and the fact that the 
victim had reposed trust and confidence in the petitioner was taken 
into account and this Court found the aggravating circumstances 
completely outweighed the other factors - The court did not find 
any mitigating circumstances in favour of review petitioners for 
awarding lesser punishment - The evidence and circumstances were 
E dealt with in the judgment under review in great detail - Therefore, 
no interference with the order of death sentence - Review petition 
liable to be dismissed. 
Death sentence - Plea of review petitioner that in the light of 
principles laid down in Bachan Singh, mitigating factors· ought to 
F have been taken into account and that proper and effective hearing 
in that regard was not extended to the petitioner -
Held: Plea not 
sustainable - Jn Bachan Singh case, the burden was·upon the State 
in respect of conditions (3) and (4) i.e. the probability that the 
accused would not commit criminal acts of violence as would 
G constitute a continuing threat to society and the probability that the 
accused can be reformed and rehabilitated - It was stated therein 
that th(! State shall by evidence prove that the accused did not satisfv 
these two conditions - However, in the subsequent paragraphs it 
was mentioned that those circumstances would certainly be relevant 
and great weight be attached to them but it was the cumulative effect 
H 
850 
VASANTA SAMPAT DUPARE v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA 
851 
of mitigating circumstances on one hand and aggravating facts on 
A 
the other, which would be weighed to come to the final conclusion 
whether the case satisfied the requirement of being "rarest of rare" 
- Therefore, the correct interpretation of Bachan Singh case is that 
mere failure on part of the State to lead such evidence would not 
clinch the issue in favour of the accused - It is a relevant B 
consideration which will be weighed by the Court together with 
other circumstances on record. 
Death sentence - Aggravating and mitigating circumstances -
Both aspects have to be given their respective weightage - The court 
has to strike a balance between the two and see towards whichside 
scale of justice tilts - The material placed on record showed that 
after the judgment under review, the petitioner completed Bachelors 
Preparatory Programme offered by the Indira Gandhi National Open 
University enabling him to prepare fo'r Bachelor level study and 
that he has also completed the Gandhi Vichar Pariksha and had 
participated in drawing competition - Jail record of the petitioner D 
was without any blemish and it was projected that there was a 
possibility of the accused being reformed and rehabilitated -
However, the aggravating circumstances namely the extreme 
depravity and the barbaric manner in which the crime was. committed 
and the fact that the victim was a helpless girl of four years clearly 
outweigh the mitigating circumstances brought on record - No case 
made out to take a different view in the matter. 
c 
E 
Code ,of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - s.235(2) - Scope of -
Plea of review petitioner that the judgment of conviction and the -~ 
order of sentence was passed by trial court on the same day which 
was opposed to the spirit of s.235(2) - Held: The purp6se of s.235(2) 
F 
is to give sufficient time to the accused or the prosecution on the 
question of sentence to show the grounds on which the prosecution 
may plead or accused may show that the maximum sentence of death 
may be the appropriate sentence or the minimum sentence of life 
imprisonment may be awarded as the case may be - However, merely G 
because no separate date was given for hearing on sentence, the · 
entire exercise is not vitiated - Plea rejected - Sentence/Sentencing. 
· Dismissing the review petitions, the Court 
HELD: 1. Sub-section (2) of Section 235 of the Cr.P.C. 
H 
852 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2017] 3 S.C.R. 
A obliges the Court to he

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