YOGENDRA @ JOGENDRA SINGH versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Citation: [2019] 1 S.C.R. 248 · Decided: 17-01-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.A. BOBDE, L. NAGESWARA RAO, R. SUBHASH REDDY · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

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

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
248
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 1 S.C.R.
YOGENDRA @ JOGENDRA SINGH
v.
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
(Criminal Appeal Nos. 84-85 of 2019)
JANUARY 17, 2019
[S. A. BOBDE, L. NAGESWARA RAO AND
R. SUBHASH REDDY, JJ.]
Penal Code, 1860 – ss.302, 326(A) and 460 – Murder –
Conviction and death sentence – High Court affirmed conviction
and sentence – Prosecution case was that the appellant threw acid
on the victim-deceased which resulted in her death – In the incident,
grandmother, nephew and brother of the deceased also received
acid burn injuries – Dying declaration was recorded by the Tehsildar
– Deceased in her dying declaration stated that the appellant had
burnt her by pouring acid on her and that he used to harass her
and abuse her on phone –Trial court held appellant guilty for murder
and disfiguring and injuring these people by throwing acid – High
Court confirmed the conviction and sentence – On appeal, held:
Appellant was rightly convicted for causing the death of deceased
– All the circumstances of the case and particularly the dying
declaration of victim unerringly pointed to the appellant as the one
who caused her death beyond any reasonable doubt – The Dying
Declaration of the deceased can be given highest probative value
and offered a strong foundation for the conviction of the appellant
– Crime against women.
Sentence/Sentencing – Death sentence – Appellant threw acid
on the victim-deceased which resulted in her death – Whether there
were special reasons to award death sentence to the appellant –
Held: The term ‘special reasons’ undoubtedly means reasons that
are one of a special kind and not general reasons – In the instant
case, appellant committed this crime when he was out on bail in
another case in which he was convicted for murder and his sentence
was upheld – The earlier incident was totally unrelated to the
circumstance of this case and took place almost ten years before
this incident – This case was related to the appellant being
disappointed in his relation with the deceased who he believed
[2019] 1 S.C.R. 248
248
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
249
deserted him – The circumstance of the case and particularly the
choice of acid did not disclose a cold-blooded plan to murder the
deceased – It is possible that what was premeditated was an injury
and not death – There was no particular depravity or brutality in
the acts of the appellant that warranted a classification of this case
as ‘rarest of the rare’ – Therefore, the sentence of death imposed by
the High Court is set aside and instead the appellant is awarded
life  imprisonment  – Penal Code, 1860 – ss.302, 326(A) and 460.
Allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1. All the witnesses deposed that the appellant threw
acid on them as well. In fact the acid disfigured the face of PW-4.
PW 8, the father of the deceased deposed that as soon as he
came out from his room on hearing the cries of the deceased he
saw the appellant running away from the place. The said evidence
amply justified the conviction of the accused beyond any
reasonable doubt. The rest of the evidence is consistent, cogent
and reliable.  The appellant committed this crime when he was
out on bail in another case wherein he has been convicted for
murder and his sentence has been upheld. The earlier incident
was totally unrelated to the circumstance of this case. The said
incident took place almost ten years before the present incident.
In the instant case, the incident is related to the appellant being
disappointed in his relation with the deceased who he believed
deserted him. The circumstance of the case and particularly the
choice of acid did not disclose a cold-blooded plan to murder the
deceased. Like in many cases the intention seems to have been
to severely injure or disfigure the deceased; in this case the
intention resulted into an attack more severe than planned which
then resulted in the death of  the deceased.  There was no
particular depravity or brutality in the acts of the Appellant that
warrants a classification of this case as ‘rarest of the rare’.
Therefore, the sentence of death imposed by the High Court is
set aside and instead the appellant is directed undergo
imprisonment for life.  [Paras 7, 8, 9, 11 and 12][252-F-G; 253-A,
C-E; 254-G-H; 255-A]
Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 684;
Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab (1983) 3 SCC 470 :
[1983] 3 SCR 413 –  followed.
YOGENDRA @ JOGENDRA SINGH v. STATE OF MADHYA
PRADESH
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
250
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2

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