VIVIAN RODRICK versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL

Citation: [1971] 3 S.C.R. 546 · Decided: 27-01-1971 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.M. SIKRI

Judgment (excerpt)

546 
VIVIAN RODRICK 
v. 
STATE OF WEST BENGAL 
January 27, 1971 
[S. M. SIKRI, C.J., P. JAGANMOHAN REDDY 
AND I. D. DuA, JJ.] 
Criminal Law-Sentence of death-Inordinate delay in disposing of 
appeal by High Court-If ground for awarding lesser sentence. 
The accused was committed 10 1rial in July 1963 and was convicted 
A 
B 
and sentenced to death on September 4, 1964. The appeal to the High 
Court under s. 411A, Cr. P.C., was finally dismissed on February 6, 1970. 
C 
The High Court left it to the State Government whether it should, reduce . 
the sentence on account of inordinate delay. 
· 
· 
In appeal to this Court on th~ quesfion of sentence, 
HELD : Section 302, l.P.C., prescribes two alternate sentences, namely, .. ·n·· ·.·.·.· ... ' .. : 
.. ' ... • 
.• .r.·.: 
.. ,~
death sentence or imprisonment for life. When there has been inordinat~ 
1 
delay fa the disposal of the ap;1eal by the High Court, it is a relevant 
factor for the High Court to take into consideration for imposing the 
lesser oentence. [549 A-Bl 
In the present case, the appellant has been for 6 years under the. f,ear 
of sentence of death, which must have caused him unimaginable mental 
agony. 
In view of the excessive delay it is a fit case for awarding .the 
lesser sentence instead of leaving it to the Government to decide the 
matter on a mercy petition. (549 B-Dl 
Nawab Singh v. State of U.P., A.LR. 1954 S.C. 278, referred to. 
CRI¥£INAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 
137 of 1970. 
E 
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated 
F 
February 6, 1970 of the Calcutta High Court in Criminal Appeal 
No. 5 of 1964. 
0. P. Rana, for the appellant. 
S. P. Mitra and Sukumar Basu, for the respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
Sikri, C.J. In this. case special leave was limited to the ques-
tion of sentence only The relevant facts for determining this 
point are as f9llows : The appellant, Vivian Rodrick, was tried 
by the High Court of Calcutta, in exercise of its original jurisdic-
tion, having ]J.;!en committed to stand his trial by the Presidency 
Magistrate as early as July 31, 1963. 
The substance of the 
charges against the appellant were as follows : 
G 
H 
A. 
c 
D 
E 
.F 
Ii 
VIVIAN RODRICK V, WEST llENGAL (Sikri, C.J.) 
54 7 
(i) that on January 13, 1963 the appellant was a 
member of an unlawful assembty guilty of riot· 
ing, being armed with deadly weapons and as 
such punishable under section 148, I.P.C.; 
(ii) 
(iii) 
that on January 13, 1963· the appellant com-
mitted the murder of one Vincent D'Rozaric and 
thereby committed an offence punishable under 
section 302, l.P .C.; and 
that on January 13, 1963 the appellant was in 
possession of explosive substances for unlawful 
object and thereby committed an offence under 
section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act. 
Four other persons, Stanley Rodrick, Ranjit Mandal, Simon Das 
and Ranjit Biswas were also tried jointly with the appellant and 
convicted under s. 302 read with s. 149, and also under s. 148, 
l.P .C. The jury returned a unanimous verdict of guilty against 
the appellant and on September 4, 1964 the Presiding Judge con· 
victed the appellant under s. 302, I.P.C., and sentenced him to 
death. At the trial the appellant was also convicted for offences 
under s. 148, I.P .C., and s. 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, and 
sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years and three years 
respectively. The terms of imprisonment were directed to run 
concurrently. 
The appellant filed a petition of appeal under s. 41 lA, Cr. P.C., 
on September 7, 1964, challenging his conviction and the sen-
tences imposed on him. The High Court,_ by its judgment dated 
September 19, 1967 in Criminal Appeal No. 5 of 1964, confirmed 
the conviction and sentences imposed on the aptlellant. In con-
sidering the question of sentence the High Court observed that 
"the murder was a premeditated and cold-bl9oded one. 
There 
was not the slightest provocation from the side of the deceased. · 
This is undoubtedly a fit case for capital punishment. No question 
of showing any leniency on the ground of tenderness of age arises 
as the appellant is now aged about 35 years." It was urged be-
fore the High Court that the sentence of death should be reduced 
to rigorous imprisonment for life on account of the long delay 
that had taken place in hearing the appeal. Although the High 
Court regretted the delay and the consequent mental suffering 
undergone by the con

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