Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rahul Kawade vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 September, 2025
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal, Avanindra Kumar Singh
1
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:49786
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT J A B A L P U R
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH
CRIMINAL REFERENCE CAPITAL No. 2 of 2023
IN REFERENCE
Versus
RAHUL KAWDE
Appearance:
Mr. Aditya Adhikari - learned Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Satish
Chand Chaturvedi and Shri Kaushtubh Chaturvedi - learned Advocates
as amicus curiae.
Mr. Atulanand Awasthy - learned Sr. Advocate for the appellant
assisted by Ms. Renu Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondent.
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 4955 of 2023
RAHUL KAWADE
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
2
Appearance:
Mr. Atulanand Awasthy - learned Sr. Advocate for the appellant
assisted by Ms. Renu Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant.
Mr. Nitin Gupta - learned Government Advocate for the respondent/
State.
.....................................................................................................
Reserved on : 03.09.2025
Pronounced on : 27.09.2025
JUDGMENT
Per: Justice Vivek Agarwal This criminal appeal and criminal reference originate from the judgment dated 21.02.2023 passed by learned Second Sessions Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Act 2012, Itarsi in POCSO Session Trial No. 71 of 2022, whereby learned Trial Court has convicted the appellant Rahul Kawde and sentenced him as under :-
Conviction Sentence
Section Imprisonment Fine Default of fine
363 I.P.C. 3 year R.I. 1,000/- 01 month
additional R.I.
376(AB) of I.P.C. Death sentence 5,000/- 6 months R.I.
376 (2) (F) I.P.C. Life 5,000/- 6 months R.I.
imprisonment
302 I.P.C. Death sentence 5,000/- 6 months R.I.
Section 5(M)/ 6 of Death sentence 5,000/- 6 months R.I.
POCSO Act
Section 5(N)/ 6 of Death sentence 5,000/- 6 months R.I.
POCSO Act
2. It is submitted that date of incident is 18.11.2022 between 10 a.m. to 11 a.m. Deceased was an eight year old child whose body was found at firing range jungle of Char Tekra village.
33. It is submitted that as per the prosecution case, father of the victim lodged a report on 18.11.2022 at police station Kesla to the effect that he is a resident of village Shaktipura. He has two children. Victim was a student of fourth class. Rahul Kawde i.e the appellant is his son-in-law. who had visited Shaktipura from his village Dabri on 17.11.2022 as a guest. On 18.11.2022 complainant, his wife and younger brother had gone in search of work, whereas his father had gone to fields on 17.11.2022 and had not returned back. At his residence his mother and both the children along with their son-in-law Rahul Kawde were present.
4. When this complainant PW4 and his wife reached home then he was informed by his mother that the deceased - victim was taken by Rahul between 10 to 11 a.m. and, thereafter, Rahul had returned back at about 12 noon but he was alone. His daughter was not available in the house since 10 -11 a.m. and somebody had abducted her. Age of the victim was eight years six months. On the basis of the said report In-charge S.H.O. Kesla Shri Gaurav Singh Bundela (P.W.34) lodged missing person report Ex.P/4 and then F.I.R. under Section 363 I.P.C. was recorded by the A.S.I. Ramnath Khandge as contained in Ex.P/5.
5. On search they had discovered dead body of the victim from the jungle of Char Tekra, where it was lying under a Palash tree. There was a saffron colour cloth which was spread on which victim was raped, thereafter, when victim informed Rahul that she will inform everything to her mother and grandmother, then he had throttled her to death. Gamchha was recovered at some distance from the dead body. His memorandum was recorded under section 27 of the Evidence Act as contained in Ex. P/33. Dead body identification Panchnama Ex.P/7 was prepared, Dehati Merg Intimation was recorded as per the version of P.W.4, which is annexure P/11, spot map is Ex.P/10. Safina form was issued, body was sent for post- mortem, intimation was sent to the Sub Divisional Officer, Revenue.
46. FSL officer Dr. Hrishikesh Yadav had examined the spot and also the body of the deceased. He had prepared spot map. Banti Chauhan had photographed the scene of crime and then body was sent along with constable Sharmila for post-mortem examination to the Itarsi Hospital. Seizures were made vide Ex.P/36. On the identification of Rahul Kawde, gamchha was seized which was containing stool and blood like substance. Vide Ex.P/35, the motorcycle which was used by the accused, was also recovered. The appellant was arrested vide arrest memo Ex.P/38 and its intimation was given to his father Gundal.
7. It is submitted that after investigation form was filled, accused was sent to the doctor for his medical examination where doctor had seized his pubic hair, underwear, pant, shirt, nails of both the hands and hair. Besides this, semen slide was prepared for DNA examination and his blood sample was also drawn.
8. Actual Merg of unnatural death was registered vide No. 44/22 which is Ex. P/106. Criminal case registration intimation was sent to the Magistrate vide Ex. P/107. Identification form Ex. P/17 was filled for DNA examination.
9. P.W.11 Maya Uadipura, Headmistress of the Government Primary School Shaktipura was examined and she had produced the Dakhil Kharij register of the victim vide Ex.P/29 and D.O.B. certificate Ex.P/31 which were seized by the police.
10. FSL Constable Banti Chauhan (P.W.28) had issued a certificate under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act as contained in Ex.P/95 and the envelope containing the C.D. is Ex.P/94.
11. Head constable 272 Yuyuts Yadav had produced the recording of post-mortem in a pen drive vide seizure memo Ex.P/66.
12. During investigation cousin sister of the victim P.W.1, elder sister P.W.3, her brother P.W.2, Bua P.W.8, Tauji P.W.5, grandmother P.W.6 were produced before the J.M.F.C., Itarsi for recording of their statements under 5 section 164 Cr.P.C. DNA report is Ex. P/120 dated 26.12.2022 in which it is mentioned that mixed autosomal Y-DNA profile obtained from the top of the victim does not contain Y-DNA profile obtained from the blood sample of appellant Rahul. It is mentioned that the mixed autosomal DNA profile obtained from the vaginal slide of the victim contains same strains of Y- chromosomal strains as were found on Article S underwear of the appellant Rahul Kawde. It is also mentioned that the woman female DNA profile obtained from the pant of Rahul as contained in Ex./T matches with the DNA profile obtained from the vaginal slide of the victim. Thus, it is submitted that the act of the appellant in taking away the victim, then violating her privacy and when she stated that she will report the matter to her mother and grandmother, then gruesomely putting an end to her life is the charge against the appellant.
13. It is also pointed out that there is a last seen witness namely P.W.12 stated that deceased was his granddaughter. Incident took place on 18.11.2022. He has a general mercantile shop along with a refreshment shop at Kalaakhar Road. The place where his shop is situated, the road leads towards Char Tekra. At about 10:30 to 11 a.m., he was sitting alone in the shop when he had seen Rahul taking the victim towards Kalaakhar. His shop is between Sukhtawa and Kalaakhar. He had also seen saffron gumchha tide around the neck of Rahul. His motorcycle was of TVS company which had white lines on the petrol tank. At about 11-12 am, grandfather of the victim had come to his shop in search of the victim when he was informed that victim was taken by Rahul and had not returned back. This witness had informed the grandfather of the victim that he had seen Rahul taking victim on his motorcycle towards Kalaakhar. At about 1-2 p.m., again father of the victim and her grandfather had interrogated this witness and he had again repeated what he had said to victim's grandfather. Thereafter, he had closed his shop and had gone in search of the victim. When they interrogated Rahul, then he stated that he 6 had left the victim on the shop of 'Durgesh', after purchasing some chocolates. He was continuously misleading them.
14. Shri Aditya Adhikari - learned Sr. Counsel submits that as far as the offence is concerned, commission of offence is not denied. In answer to question number 371 under section 313 Cr.P.C. the appellant admitted that he was under the influence of alcohol. He could not comprehend his acts. He had throttled her but had not violated privacy of the victim.
15. Thus, it is submitted that instead of taking this court through the maze of evidence which has come on record, his only prayer is that since the appellant is a youth of 22 years, he has no criminal antecedents and this was the first crime committed by him at the spur of the moment, for the reasons unknown to him or under the influence of intoxicant, the sentence of death penalty be modified to that of life imprisonment. In support of this contention, he has placed reliance on judgment of this court in Criminal Reference No. 03 of 2021 (In Reference vs. Virendra Adiwasi ).
16. It is pointed out that on the last date i.e. 07.08.2025, while hearing the Criminal Reference, it was observed that case was reserved for judgment by learned Trial Court on 13.02.2023. Judgment of conviction under Section 363, 376(A)(B), 376(2)(F) and 302 of IPC read with Section 5(M)/5(N)/6 of POCSO Act was delivered on 21.02.2023 and on the same date sentence was passed. Attention was drawn to Sub-section (2) of Section 235 of Cr.P.C., which provides that after an accused is convicted, the judge shall, unless he proceeds in accordance with the provisions of Section 360, hear the accused on question of sentence, and then pass sentence on him according to law.
17. Shri Aditya Adhikari, learned Sr. Counsel along with Shri Atulanand Awasthy, another learned Sr. Counsel submits that adherence to the provisions contained in Sub-Section (2) of Section 235 is mandatory and there appears to be a breach of this provision.
718. Shri Aditya Adhikari, learned Senior Advocate, has placed reliance on the judgment of Supreme Court in Allauddin Mian and others, Shariff Mian and another Vs. State of Bihar; 1989 (3) SCC 5, wherein the ratio of law is that requirement of hearing the accused is not a hollow formality but is to be given a logical meaning to said hearing where appellant has an opportunity to understand and comprehend the aspect of conviction so to address the court on the quantum of sentence.
19. With the consent of the counsel for the parties, after observing that there were two options available to us, one of remanding the matter to the Trial Court to make compliance of the provisions contained in Sub-section (2) of Section 235 and another being calling of the report of the Social Welfare Officer of the State and other stakeholders etc. in regard to family background and antecedents of the appellant, we consciously chose second option and ordered for submission of said reports.
20. Shri Nitin Gupta, learned Government Advocate, has produced these serial audit reports and according to the Social Investigation Report bearing Sr. No./ Pension/ 336 dated 19.08.2025 furnished by the Deputy Director of Social Justice and Differently Abled Empowerment Department, Betul, it is mentioned that appellant Rahul Kawde is aged about 22 years. He is married and belongs to Scheduled Tribe category. They are two brothers and one sister. Sister is married and residing in her in-law's house. It's a unitary family and the history of family was found to be clean inasmuch as it is reported that there is no criminal history of the family. On searching the records from Police station Bijadehi from 2015 to 2022, no crime was reported to have been performed by the appellant. It is also mentioned that he has deep faith in the Hindu religion and his parents are illiterate. They earn their livelihood through work of labour. Their financial status is poor. Relationship amongst the members of the family is cordial, lifestyle is general. Their house is a temporary hutment erected in the fields of one Manoj Rathore, in whose fields his parents are working.
8General discipline in the family is normal and school teacher informed that Rahul Kawde studied up to seventh class and he was good in studies but was not regular. Teachers also opined that his behaviour in the school was good. No information in regard to improper behaviour was furnished. He dropped out of the school because of poor financial condition after passing the seventh class. He was found to be obedient towards his teacher and his behaviour towards the fellow students was cordial and good. His behaviour towards the villagers as informed by the residents of the village was reported to be social, obedient and cultured. No habit of drugs or any other intoxicant was found in him. It was also found that he was not involved in any of evils like gambling, theft, etc.
21. Deputy Director, Social Justice, opined that his family and he carries a very cordial and cooperative reputation in the village and no criminal record was found.
22. Another report has been produced by Shri Nitin Gupta as obtained from the Superintendent of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose Central Jail, Jabalpur bearing S.No. 1022/Law/2025 dated 17.08.2025, in which Superintendent of Jail has mentioned that appellant is following the rules of the jail and is pursuing his daily routine. He is involved in the cleaning of the jail temple and he has an inclination to read religious books. His behaviour towards the fellow inmates is cordial.
23. Another report is produced by Shri Nitin Gupta from S.H.O., P.S. Bijadehi District Betul bearing S.No. P.S./ Bijadehi/306/2025 dated 18.08.2025 which says that there is no criminal record of appellant Rahul Kavde.
24. It is also informed by Shri Nitin Gupta that even at P.S. Kesla, concerned S.D.O.P. has reported that no criminal case is registered against the appellant and he was regularly visiting his in-laws at Sukhtawa though he is a resident of Bijadehi district Betul.
925. When these facts are taken into consideration then, though Shri Nitin Gupta submits that appellant is guilty of misusing the position of trust and being a close relative of the victim and the complainant, had misused that trust by transgressing his authority and kidnapping the victim who was already known to him and he was staying in the house of the victim and then putting an end to her life, therefore, no leniency is called for. It is vehemently submitted by Shri Nitin Gupta that if such persons like the appellant are allowed to be shown some leniency, then the social message will be negative which cannot be the object of the court proceedings.
26. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, and considering the fact that Supreme Court has already taken stock of such situations by referring to the judgments on the aspect of consideration of aggravating and mitigating circumstances.
27. The Apex Court, way back in Bachan Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC 684 and Machhi Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab (1983) 3 SCC 470 laid down the principles for the purpose of deciding the quantum of sentence. The mitigating circumstances and aggravating circumstances need to be looked into while deciding the quantum of penalty. The Apex Court also laid down the 'crime test', 'criminal test' and 'R-R test'.
28. The High Court of Madhya Pradesh considered this aspect in great detail in ILR 2023 MP 353 (In Reference Vs. Ramnath Kewat @ Bhursoo).
1029. The Division Bench of this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 2810 of 2019 (Ribu @ Akbar Khan Vs. State of M.P.) and connected matter i.e. Criminal Reference No. 03 of 2019 (In Reference Vs. Ribu @ Akbar Khan) in paragraph 82 has reproduced a chart for ready reference as below :-
Death Sentence Commuted to Life Imprisonment S.No. Case Details High Court's Reasons for View Commuting Sentence
1. (1994) 4 SCC 353 - 1. Ten murders Specter of death Jashubha Bharat taken place in hanging over head broad day light. of the accused for Singh Gohil v. State of
2. Conscious of the more than six Gujrat. state shaken. years. Offence-u/s 302 IPC 3. The manner in 12 which the murders Persons tried for commit- were committed ting murder of ten persons exposed its gravity.
and causing injuries to oth- 4. Unarmed and ers. Trial Court convicted innocent persons, the accused for life impris- returning after offer- onment and High Court en- ing condolence. hanced the punishment to death sentence. Supreme Court commuted to Life Imprisonment.
Special reasons to be assigned u/s 354(3) Cr.P.C.
2. (1999) 3 SCC 19 - 1. Gruesome Act *Noticing the Om Prakash v. State of 2. Premediated and mentally depressed well though condition, caused by Haryana. murder constant harassment Offence- u/s 302/34 and dispute. Held IPC and Section 25 of the not rarest of rare Arms Act. The accused, case, as this is not who were the neighbours of a crime committed the deceased, entered into because of lust for the house from the rear door wealth or woman; and fired at the deceased and such as extortion, his family members to take dacoity (sic :
revenge regarding the plot dacoity) or robbery in dispute and dread any- nor even for lust and body to confront them at the rape, it is not an 11 risk of elimination. 7 per- act of anti social sons murdered. element, kidnapping and trafficking a minor girl or dealing in dangerous drugs which affects the entire moral fibers of the society and kills a number of persons, nor it is a crime committed for power or critical ambitions or part of organ-
ized criminal activ-
ities.
3. (2001) 2 SCC 28 - 1. Age of the 1. No criminal Mohd. Chaman v. State victim 1 ½ years. antecedents.
2. Prey to lust of 30 2. No possibility (NCT of Delhi). u/s years old man in of continued 376,302 of the IPC. The a preplanned threat to the father of the victim was run- way. society or such; ning a tailoring factory near 3. Killed in most a dangerous his house. The accused was revolting manner person that to esiding in the same house in a arousing intense spare his life room adjacent to the room of and extreme will endanger the victim's parents. The ac- indignation of the community. cused sexually assaulted the the community. victim aged 1 ½ years bitten 4. An act of over the cheek, injuries in va- extreme ginal wall, liver lacerated depravity and with vertical deep laceration, arouses a sense in the adjacent room from of where the mother of the vic- revolution in the tim picked up the victim in an mind of common unconscious state, who was man.
declared dead by the Doctor. 5. Menace to the society as it is a calculated and cold-blooded murder.
4. (2002) 3 SCC 76 - 1. The injuries sus- 1. No evidence of Lehna v. State of Hary- tained by the ac- any diabolic cused were of planning to ana. Offence: u/s very serious commit the 302,458,324 IPC. The father nature. crime. of deceased and accused had 2. Three persons of 2. Deprived of the given 2 acres of land to the the same family livelihood on accused for the purpose of died, who were account of the cultivation but the accused his own kith and land being taken 12 who was a person of bad kins. away.
habits tried to alienate the 3. Frequency of land that was given to him by quarrels his father. There was constant indicates lack of quarrel between the family any sinister over the ancestral land and planning to take the accused assaulted the de- lives.
ceased and the family mem- 4. The factual
bers and three persons of the scenario gives
same family died. impression of
impulsive act
and not a
planned assault.
5. (2002) 9 SCC 168 - 1. Meticulously 1. Quarrels and
Vashram Narshi Bhai planned. continuous
2. Brutal & a harassment.
Rajpara v. State of
gruesome act. 2. Constant
Gujrat. Offence : 302 nagging
and 201 IPC. The accused, a well
fruit vendor purchased a affected the
house and started living in mental
the house with his family balance and
consisting of his wife, four such
daughters and a son aged 5 sustained
years. The wife and the provocation.
daughter of the accused did 3. No criminal not like the house and star- background ted pressurizing him to sell and not and purchase another menace to house. The accused pur- the society. chased 5 litres of petrol in 4. Mentally plastic can and kept in the depressed kitchen. The accused and his condition of son slept on the terrace of the the accused. house and other members slept in the rear room on the ground floor. At about 3.00 am, the accused sprinkled the petrol on his wife and daugh-
ters and set them on fire, thereafter, the accused ran away from the room by clos-
ing the door from outside.
Brutal and cold-blooded murder of his wife and four daughters by setting them on fire.
6. (2003) 7 SCC 141 - 1. 21 persons 1. Incident was Ram Pal v. State of murdered by a sequel of gunshot injur- murder of U.P. ies or by burn- close relative 13 Offence: ing in latched of accused by 302,307,436,440/ 149 of houses. the victims IPC. The victim's family 2. Young family. was accused of having children were 2. Sufficient committed the murder of victims. provocation. two of the close relatives 3. Spent 17 of the accused family, who years in in turn murdered 21 persons custody after including young children by the incident. gunshot injury or burning them in latched houses.
7. (2008) 13 SCC 767 1. Planned and Standardisation of
-Swamy Shraddanand cold-blooded sentence process murder. impossible and @ Murli Manohar 2. Motive behind tends Mishra v. State of the crime. to sacrifice justice Karnataka. at Offence u/s: 302,201 the altar of IPC. uniformity.
The accused married the deceased who the crime.
came from a highly reputed and wealthy background.
She was the grand daughter of a former Deewan of the Princely State of Mysore and held vast and very valu-
able landed properties in her own right. The accused murdered his wife after giv-
ing heavy dose of sleeping pills and put her in a wooden box when she was alive, dug a pit, filled with earth and cemented the surface and covered with stone slab.
8. (2009) 6 SCC 498 - 1. Manner and 1. Deceased Santosh Kumar Satish method of was friend not disposal of enemy of ac-
Bariyar v. State of
body of cused.
Maharashtra. deceased was 2. Motive to Offence: u/s 302 IPC abhorrent. collect money. The accused, who were the 2. Most foul and 3. Age of ac- friends of the victim despicable cused hatched a conspiracy to ab- case of 4. No crim- duct the victim for a murder. inal history ransom of Rs. 10 lakhs 5. Not profes- from the victim's family sional killer. The accused called the 6. All unem-
victim to see a movie and ployed searching
after seeing the movie, a jobs.
14
ransom call for a demand of 7. Reforma- Rs. 10 lakhs was made but tion and rehabilita- with fear of being caught, tion.
they murdered the victim, cut the body into pieces and disposed it off at different places.
*Doctrine of Rehabilitation and weightage of mitigating circumstances. *Doctrine of Prudence in case of circumstantial evidence.
9. (2010) 9 SCC 747 - Accused belongs to a 1. Case of Santosh Kumar Singh category with unlim- circumstan-
ited power or even tial evidence.
v. State through CBI.
more dangerously, 2. Age of ac-
Offence u/s: 302 & 376 volatile and heady cused 24/25 IPC. Deceased student of cocktail of two. years. LLB 6th Semester was being 3. Motive and harassed and intimidated by murder had the accused continuously, been pro- thereupon, the deceased ceeded by made several complaints continuous against the accused in dif- harassment ferent Police stations. On by the de- day of incident the deceased ceased over returned to her residence, two years. where she was sexually as-
saulted and murdered by the accused. There were 19 in-
juries on the body, but no internal injury on private parts.
10. 2011) 3 SCC 685 - 1. Murder of gains Accused not from Ramesh v. State of Ra- wealthy background.
2. Criminal record Motive was money. jasthan. 3. Ramesh/ Circumstantial Offence u/s : 302, appellant inflicted evidence. 392,120-B, 201, 404, 414, injuries on both Reformation and re- 457 & 460/34IPC. the deceased. habilitation Accused Gordhanlal con- Languishing in spired with evidence. other Death Cell for more than accused persons trespassed six years. into the house of deceased Ramlal by night and looted ornaments of gold and sil-
ver and murdered 2 persons.
11. (2011) 7 SCC 437 - 1. Brutal and 1. 2nd marriage State of Maharashtra diabolic killing of of father.
3 innocent family 2. Continuous v. Goraksha Ambaju members. quarrels for Adsul. Offence: u/s- 2. Manner in division of 302,201 of IPC.The ac- which crime is property. cused who was serving in committed is 3. Increase of the of property. Indian 15 Army, used to demand par- deplorable. pressure with tition of land and other passage of time property for him and his and frustration. brother from his father. He 4. Intensity of and his brother murdered bitterness their father and 2 family between mem- members. The deceased bers of family were administered poison- had exacerbated ous substance in pedas then thought of re- strangulated with shoe laces venge and re- and placed bodies in 2 taliation.
trunks and left them in the 5.Continous train, which were found by nagging. the Station Master next day.
12. (2012) 4 SCC 257- 1. Crime has been 1. Age of all Ramnaresh v. State of committed bru- accused.
tally. 2. Since de-
Chhattisgarh. 2. Accused ceased was Offence:u/s- 449, Ranjeet being mistress of 376(2)(g) and 302/34 IPC. brother-in-law of brother of Ran- One of the accused, brother- deceased owed a jeet, this may in law of the deceased, duty to protect have been mat- along with the other ac- rather than ter of concern. cused entered the house of sexual assault 3. Possibility of deceased when her husband and murder death of de- was away and committed along with his ceased occur- rape and murdered her. friends. ring co-incid-
3. Crime is heinous entally as a res-
committed bru- ult of act
tally. committed on
4. Helplessness of her, thus not
mother of two caused inten-
infant at the odd tionally.
night in absence 4. Not crimin-
of her husband. als nor incap-
able of being
reformed can-
not ne terms
menace.
Doctorine (sic : Doctrine) of Proportionality - The principle of propor- tion between the crime and the punishment is the principle of 'Just Deserts' that serves the foundation of every criminal sentence that is justifiable.
13. (2012) 5 SCC 766 - 1. Nature of 1. The accused Neel Kumar @Anil Ku- offence can be reformed
2. Age of victim or rehabilitated.
mar v. State of Hary-
3. Relationship 2. Not a continu-
ana of victim with ous threat to so-
Offence: u/s- 376(2)(f), accused ciety. 302 & 201 IPC. 4. Gravity of The accused, father of the injury.
16deceased, raped his own daughter who was 4 years old and murdered her.
Cause of death was As-
phyxia because of throttling which was antemortem in nature, lacerated wound was present in vagina ex-
tended from anus to ur-
ethral, opening admitting 4 fingers. Underlined muscles and Ligaments were ex-
posed and anus was also torn and on dissection, uterus was perforated in the abdomen.
14. (2013) 2 SCC 452 - 1. Body of Seema Sangeet v. State was burnt be-
low the waist
of Haryana. with a view to
Offence u/s: 302,307,148, destroy
449 r/w 149 IPC. evidence of
Due to the belief that the sexual assault.
family of injured Amardeep 2. No evidence of had performed black magic being profes- leading to death of son of sional killers.
Ramphal, Ramphal & 5 Rahul was
other accused killed 3 blown off by
adults and 1 child aged 3 firearm injury.
years. The 3 adults had bul-
let injuries other injuries by
sharp edged weapon
"kukri". Body of Seema
was burnt below the waist
and upper part of head of
child.
15. (2013) 2 SCC 713 - Extremely brutal, 1. Age of
GurvailSingh @ Gola grotesque, diabolic. first accused
was 34 years
v. State ofPunjab.
and second was
Offence- : u/s 302/34 22 years.
IPC 2. Unblem-
Accused and deceased were ished ante-
member of same family and cedents
there was dispute with re- 3. Property gard to mutation of their dispute which shares in their names, since culminated into property was not mutated. death of four The accused persons armed persons. with Datar, Kirpan and 4. Reforma-
Toka assaulted 4 persons of tion and rehab- theirfamily and murdered ilitation. them.
17R-R Test-
1. Depends on the perception of the society and not Judge-centric.
2. Looks into various factors:
1. Society's abhorrence.
2. Extreme indignation and antipathy to certain types of crime, like rape and murder of minor girls, especially intellectually challenged minor girls, minor girls with physical disability, old and infirm women with disabilities.
16. 2013) 5 SCC 546 - 1. Victim aged 11 1. Previous track Shankar Kisanrao years, innocent, record of ac-
defenceless and cused.
Khade v. State of Ma-
having moderate
harashtra. intellectual 2. Other options Offence- u/s 363, disability. are not un-
366A, 376, 302, 201 IPC 2. The accused was questionably/ Gruesome murder of a a fatherly figure foreclosed. minor girl, aged 11 years, of 52 years, with Intellectual Disability father of two (moderate) after subjecting children. her to a series of acts of 3. Ghastly manner rape by a middle aged, of execution of strangulated and murdered crime.
her. The cause of death was 4. Ruthless crime as Asphyxia due to strangula- per rape was tion and clear evidence of followed by carnal intercourse were murder.
there. 5. The action of the accused was not only inhuman but also barbaric.
6. Shocks not only judicial con-
science but the conscience of society.
7. Considered the age of accused re-
formation or re-
habilitation is practically ruled out.
17. (2014) 4 SCC 69-Anil 1. Offence u/s 377 1. No previ-
@ Anthony proved. ous criminal his-
2. Murder was tory.
Arikswamy Joseph v.
committed in 2. Possibil-
State of Maharashtra. extremely brutal, ity of reforma- Offence-u/s grotesque, tion or rehab- 302,377,201 IPC. Grue- diabolical and ilitation the age some murder of a minor dastardly manner. of 42 years can- boy, aged 10 years, who 3. Victim and not be ruled out. was staying with him from innocent boy and few days, after subjecting only son of his 18 to carnal intercourse and mother.
then strangulating him to 4. Accused was in a death. dominating position.
5. Life taken away in gruesome and barbaric manner, pricked not only the judicial conscience but also the conscience of the society.
18. (2014) 5 SCC 353- 1. Heinous crime. Accused aged 32 Raj Kumar v. State of 2. Innocent, de- years.
fenceless and
M.P.. Offence: u/s helpless minor
376,450,302 IPC. The ac- girl.
cused was the neighbour of 3. Relationship of the deceased and used to accused with call him 'Mama'. On the family of de- said night the accused had ceased.
taken liquor and meals in 4. Shocked the the house of the deceased conscience of and around midnight he society.
raped the deceased aged 14 years and murdered her.
The hymen of the deceased was torn and blood was oozing out from her private parts, some blood was also present in he cavity of her uterus.
19. (2016) 9 SCC 675 - 1. Brutality. Accused was about Tattu Lodhi @ Pan- 2. Helplessness of 27 years and there victim. was no material to cham Lodhi v. State of
3. Unprovoked negate the chance M.P.. and premedit- of accused being re- Offence: u/s 366A, ated design of formed and gaining 364, 376(200/511,201 IPC. attack. maturity. The accused asked the vic-
tim to purchase and bring gutka for him, thereafter kidnapped and committed rape of a minor girl, aged 7 year. The deceased put the dead body in a gunny bag and locked it in his house, with a view for destruction of evidence relating to the crime. The victim was throttled to death.
20. (2017) 4 SCC 393 1. Young age 19
-Sunil v. State of M.P. of accused.
Accused, 25 years old 2. Can be re-
taken his niece (victim) formed and aged 4 years on pretext of rehabilit-
taking her to the parents ated.
and raped her and murdered 3. Probability her. of not com-
mitting sim-
ilar crime.
4. Not a threat to society.
21. 2018 SCC OnLine 1. Murder of 3 1. No evidence as SC 2570 - Chhannu persons. to uncommon
2. Two of the nature of offence Lal Verma v. State of Deceased and or the improbab- Chhattisgarh. one of the ility of reforma- Offence-u/s injured person tion or rehabilit- 302,307,506(2) & 450 IPC were the ation of the ac- The accused entered the women. cused has been house of the deceased and adduced.
caused fatal injuries to 3 2. No analysis un- members of the family. dertaken by the Thereafter, the accused High Court, entered another house and whether, the per- inflicted grievous injuries son would be a toone person. threat to society or whether not granting Death Penalty would send a wrong message to the society.
3. No previous criminal record apart from ac-
quittal in the case under Sec-
tion 376 I.P.C.
4. Does not fulfil the test of Rarest of Rare case, where the altern-
ative option is unquestionably foreclosed.
5. Despite having lost all hope, yet no frustration has set on the ac-
cused as per the certificate given 20 by the Superin-
tendent of jail, his conduct in jail has been good. Thus, goes on to show that, he is not beyond reform.
6. Without assist-
ance of psycho-
logical/psychiat-
ric assessment and evaluation it would not be proper to hold that, there is no possibility or probability of re-
form.
7. Procedural im-
propriety of not having a separate hearing for sen-
tencing at the stage of trial. A bifurcated hear-
ing in conviction and sentencing, a necessary condi-
tion.
22. 2019) 2 SCC 311 1. Dastardly nature 1. Young age Viran Gyanlal Rajput and manner of 2. Lack of crim-
crime. inal ante-
v. State of Maha-
2. Youth and cedents.
rashtra. helplessness of 3. Post incarcera- Offence- u/s 363,376, the victim. tion conduct.
302 4. Not a menace to and 201 of IPC and Sec- society.
tion 10 and 4 of POCSO 5. Possibility of Act. reform.
The accused kidnapped the victim aged 13 years, raped her, murdered her by strangulation and bur-
ied her body in the field.
23. 2019 SCC OnLine SC 42 Accused was out 1. Disappointed
- Yogendra @ Joginder on bail in another with the de-
Singh v. State of M.P. case and has commit- ceased, who he
ted the crime. believed had
Offence : u/s 302, 326A
deserted him.
and 460 IPC. The deceased 2. Not a cold was married and had two 21 issues. The accused snug blooded murder. into the room of the de- 3. Intention was to ceased and warned her that, cause injury or as she doesn't want to live disfigurement, with him, he is not going to what was pre- let her live neither anybody meditated was else and threw acid on her. injury not death. When the other family 4. No particular members tried to save her, depravity or the accused threw acid on brutality in the them, in the attack the de- acts ceased sustained 90% burn injuries and died and the other three members were disfigured and injured.
*There should be special reasons for sentencing to death. The term, 'Special Reas- ons' undoubtedly means, reasons that are, one of a special kind and not general reas- ons.
24. 2019 SCC OnLine SC 43 Special Reasons"
- Nand Kishore v. not assigned by State of M.P. Of- the High Court within the mean-
fence: u/s 302, 363, ing of section 366, 367(2)(i) IPC. 354(3) Cr.P.C. to The accused took away the impose death pen- deceased aged 8 years from alty on the ac- the 'Mela' and committed cused. rape and murdered her in a barbaric manner. Both legs of the deceased were frac-
tured. Several injuries on the private parts of the de- ceased inflicted by the ac- cused due to which the in-
testine had come out. The headless body of the De-
ceased was recovered.
*Para 14, Ratio of Mukesh v. State of (NCT of Delhi)
25. 2019 SCC OnLine 1. Murder involves 1. Murder not SC 81-Raju Jagdish exceptional de- planned pravity. 2. Accused young Paswan v. State of 2. Manner of com- man aged 22 Maharashtra. Of- mission of crime years. fence: u/s 302, 376(2) is extremely bru- 3. No evidence
(f) and 201 IPC tal. produced by The accused dragged the prosecution that victim aged 9-year-old the accused had into the sugarcane field, the propensity forcibly raped her and of committing threw her in the well. The further crimes, cause of death was causing con-
drowning and there was tinuity of threat 22 evidence of vaginal as to society.
well as anal intercourse. 4. The state did not bring on re-
cord any evid-
ence to show that the accused cannot be re-
formed and re-
habilitated.
26. 2019 SCC OnLine 1. Heinous offence 1. Case rests on SC 363 -Sachine Ku- in a premeditated circumstantial manner. evidence.
mar Singraha v. State 2. False pretext 2. Probability of of M.P. given to the reformation.
Offence : u/s 363, uncle of victim 3. Absence of 376A, 302, 201-11 IPC & to gain custody prior offending Section 5(i)(m) r/w Section of history. 6 of POCSO Act. victim. 4. His overall con- The accused was the owner 3. Abused faith. duct. and driver of the vehicle in 4. Exploited the which he had taken the innocence and victim aged 5 years to the helplessness of school, from the custody of the child. her uncle on the false pre-
text of going along with her to school as he had to pay fees of his daughter.
Thereafter, the victim was raped and murdered and body was found in the well with only an underwear.
27. Criminal Appeal No. 1. Age of accused 1411/2018- Dhy- at the time of commission of aneshwar Suresh offence was 22 Borkar v. State of years.
Maharashtra. 2. Spent 18 years
Offence-u/s 302, 364, in jail.
201,34 IPC 3. While in jail,
Accused killed a minor his conduct was
child. good.
4. Tried to join the
society and has
tried to become
a civilised man,
completed his
graduation from
jail. He has tried
to become re-
formative.
5. Written poems
from jail. It ap-
23
pears he has
realized his mis-
take.
30 A three Judge Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal
Nos. 877-878 of 2020 (Ramesh A. Naika Vs. The Registrar General, High Court of Karnataka Etc.) has summarized the law laid down on this point in paragraph 15 in tabular form, which is reproduced below :-
PART - I WHEREIN DEATH PENALTY WAS COMMUTED TO LIFE SENTENCE WITHOUT REMISSION FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE CONVICT'S LIFE
1. Swamy Appellant killed • The manner of Shraddana wife who was the committing murder nda (2) granddaughter of a did not cause any v. Dewan. mental or physical State of 3 Subsequently, he pain to the victim.
Karnataka sold off her • Appellant confessed (2008)13 properties and was his guilt before the SCC 767 absconding. High Court. @54
2. Sebastian Appellant • Appellant was 24- v. kidnapped a 2- years-old at the time State of years-old girl from of the incident.
Kerala her house,
(2010) 1 2 committed rape on
SCC 58 her and then
murdered her.
24
3. B. Kumar Appellant worked • Appellant's motive
v. as a mason in the was not to commit
Inspector house of the murder but to commit
of Police victims. rape on the
(2015) 2 prosecutrix. @18
SCC 346 He committed rape • No possibility of him
3 on a woman, having committed any
murdered a boy another offence since
whom he had tied; he was apprehended 6
being an eyewitness years after the
to the act of rape, incident. @21 and further injured an eyewitness to the murder.
4. 'X' Appellant Appellant suffering from v. murdered two severe mental illness State of minor girls after since 1994, i.e., post-
Maharasht committing rape on conviction, during his
3 them. long incarceration as a
ra
(2019) 7 death row convict, i.e., 17
The deceased years. @74
SCC 1
victims were the
Appellant's
neighbour.
5. Sudam Petitioner murdered • Nature of
v. his wife, his two circumstantial
State of children and the evidence is a
Maharasht two children from mitigating factor in
ra, 3 his wife's the instant case. @21
(2019) 9 extramarital affair. • No medical evidence
SCC 388 to show that
Petitioner had crushed
the face of deceased
to avoid
identification. @16
25
6. Ravishank Appellant • Key witness made
ar kidnapped a 13- contradictory
v. year-old girl. statement
State of Thereafter, he
M.P. committed rape on
(2019) 9 her and murdered
SCC 689 her by throttling.
Subsequently, he
destroyed evidence
3 by throwing her
half-naked body in
a dry well.
7. Vijay Appellant • No criminal
Kumar murdered 3 minor antecedents.
v. children and caused • Not a professional
State of injury to the killer. @12
J&K remaining minor
(2019) 12 3 child and their
SCC 791 father.
8. Rajendra Appellant Prosecution failed to
Pralhadrao committed rape and produce available DNA
Wasnik murder of a 3-year- evidence and other
v. old girl. material evidence before
State of the Trial Court. @57
Maharasht 3
ra Possibility of reformation
(2019) 12 and rehabilitation not
SCC 460 courts. @79
26
9. Mohd. Petitioner-accused • Legal aid provided to
Mannan was a mason him was inadequate.
v. working at the @ 38
State of house of an 8-year- • No opportunity given
Bihar old girl. He to the Petitioner to
(2019) 16 kidnapped, raped illustrate mitigating
SCC 584 and murdered the factors. @ 39
child. • No evidence showing
murder was
3 Case is based on premeditated. @47
circumstantial • No DNA analysis of
evidence and the sperm found on
alleged extra- the victim's body
judicial confession conducted by the
made by the prosecution. @53
Petitioner. @57 • Psychiatrist report
shows possibility of
neurological and/or
mental health issues.
@68
• Post conviction
mental health of the
Petitioner a relevant
consideration. @84
10. Dattatraya Appellant is a 50- • No evidence to show
v. year-old man who that Appellant took
State of committed rape on victim to his
Maharasht- a 5-year-old girl residence. @114
ra which resulted in • No evidence to show
her death. that murder was
(2020) 14 3 intended or
SCC 290 premeditated.
Appellant did not
carry any weapon.
• Possibility of the
Appellant being
unaware that sexual
assault would result in
27
death cannot be ruled
out. @123
• Legal assistance to
the Appellant
ineffective. @129
• Question of reform
not considered by the
Trial Court. @130
11. Jagdish Petitioner murdered • Petitioner in custody
v. his wife and five since 14 years.
State of children. • Unexplained delay of
M.P., 3 4 years in forwarding
(2020) 14 the mercy petition by
SCC 156 State. @12
12. Rabbu Appellant • Appellant brought up
v. committed rape on by single father,
State of a minor girl and set comes from a
M.P., her on fire, thereby backward socio-
2024 SCC 3 killing her. economic stratum of
OnLine SC society, was 22-year-
2933 old at the time of
incident, has no
criminal antecedents
and possibility of
reform cannot be
ruled out.
@15-16
13. Deen Dayal Appellant • Absence of previous
Tiwari murdered his wife criminal antecedents.
v. and four minor • Appellant's behavior
State of daughters with an in custody has been
U.P. axe. "satisfactory" and
3 "normal," noting that
2025 SCC he has been
OnLine SC performing assigned
237 duties without any
adverse conduct.
• Nothing on record
Appellant is incapable
of rehabilitation. @20
PART - II
CASES WHEREIN LIFE SENTENCE HAS BEEN IMPOSED TILL THE END OF THE CONVICT'S NATURAL LIFE SUBJECT TO REMISSION 28 S. Case Details JJ. Brief Facts Reasons for Commuting No. Sentence
1. Mulla Appellants abducted • One of the Appellants is 65- v. and murdered five years-old and in custody State of U.P. persons. since 14 years. @79 (2010) 3 SCC • Appellants belong to an 508 2 extremely poor background.
• Possibility of reformation not ruled out. @81
2. Rameshbhai Appellant murdered • Appellant was 27-years-old Chandubhai and committed rape at the time of the incident. Rathod (2) on a minor girl who • Possibility of reformation v. belonged to the not ruled out.
State of 3 apartment of which • Appellant not granted Gujarat he was a watchman. adequate opportunity to (2011) 2 SCC plead on the question of 764 sentence. @7
3. Sandesh Appellant • Appellant was 23-years-old v. committed robbery at the time of incident. State of during which he • Murder not premeditated. Maharashtra fatally injured a • Appellant not a hardened 2 pregnant woman criminal.
(2013) 2 SCC and her mother-in- • Good conduct in jail. 479 law. Subsequently, he murdered another relative of the victims during the commission of the robbery.
4. Mohinder Appellant murdered • Appellant did not harm his Singh his wife and other daughter while v. daughter because of committing the crime. State of Punjab a previous case filed • Appellant is a poor man (2013) 3 SCC by his wife against unable to sustain himself.
294 2 the Appellant for • Probability of reformation committing rape on not foreclosed. @28 his minor daughter.
5. Deepak Rai 3 accused • Death sentence commuted v. committed murder only in respect of A-3, i.e., State of Bihar of informant's wife Bacha Babu Rai. (2013) 10 SCC 3 and five children. • No overt act attributed to A-
421 3.
6. Vyas Ram Appellants killed 35 • Only 1 witness has v. persons and injured attributed the role of slitting State of Bihar 7 belonging to the a throats to the Appellant. (2013) 12 SCC 2 particular • Incident took place in 1992 349 community. - charges framed in 2004.
297. Sunil Damodar Appellant murdered • Appellant suffered from Gaikwad his wife and two economic and psychic v. sons. He attempted compulsions. State of 2 to murder his • Possibility of reformation Maharashtra daughter but she cannot be ruled out. (2014) 1 SCC survived. • No criminal antecedents.
129 • Appellant was living in abject poverty.
8. Mahesh Appellants • Appellants were 23-29-
Dhanaji Shinde murdered two years-old at the time of
v. minors and seven incident.
State of 3 persons after which • Appellants lived in acute
Maharashtra the Appellants poverty.
(2014) 4 SCC robbed them • Appellants have pursued
292 further education and
meaningful endeavours
during custody. @38
9. Sushil Sharma Appellant murdered • No criminal antecedents.
v. his wife with a • No evidence to show
State (NCT of firearm and burnt absence of possibility of
Delhi) the body in a reformation.
(2014) 4 SCC 3 tandoor. • Appellant has spent 10
317 years in death cell.
• Appellant is the only son of
his parents who are old and
infirm. @105
10. Mohd. The incident • The acts committed were
Jamiludin pertains to attack on not directed against the
Nasir police personnel sovereignty of the State.
v. wherein 5 police Hence, it could not be
State of West officials were killed equated with precedents
Bengal and 13 others were such as Navjot Sandhu,
(2014) 7 SCC 2 injured along with Ajmal Kasab or Mohd. Arif.
443 other civilians. • Aftab was the mastermind
behind the entire operation
Death penalty of - did not commit the act
accused Aftab himself. He made the other
commuted to life accused commit the
imprisonment till murders through.
the end of his life.
11. Arvind Singh Appellant • Appellants were 19-years-
v. kidnapped an 8- old at the time of the
State of years-old boy to incident.
Maharashtra 3 demand ransom. • No criminal antecedents.
(2021) 11 SCC Subsequently, he A-1 surrendered at the first
1 murdered the boy. opportunity. @98
30
31. Hon'ble Coordinate Bench of this court in Criminal Reference No.3 of 2019 and Criminal Appeal No. 2810 of 2019, taking note of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mohd. Firoz Vs. State of M.P.; 2022 SCC OnLine 480, in which a small girl of four years was brutally assaulted and raped by appellant therein while affirming the conviction of the appellant for the offences charged against him, the Supreme Court commuted sentence of death to the sentence of imprisonment for remainder of natural life for offense punishable under Section 302 I.P.C.. In the facts and circumstances of this case, so also in view of social audit report / jail report in regard to conduct of the appellant so also the reports from the concerned police personnel, we deem it proper to follow the same course and while affirming the conviction deem it proper to commute the sentence considering the gravity and seriousness of the offense to the sentence of imprisonment for a period of 20 years without remission and accordingly the impugned judgment of conviction of the appellant is affirmed, death sentence imposed under Sections 376(AB) of IPC, 302 of IPC, 5(M)/ 6 of POCSO Act and 5(N)/ 6 of POCSO Act stands modified to the sentence of imprisonment for the remainder of appellant's natural life and we answer the reference accordingly.
32. Case property be disposed of in terms of the order of the Trial Court.
33. Record of the Trial Court be sent back immediately.
34. We place on record our appreciation for the services rendered by Shri Aditya Adhikari, Sr. Advocate as an amicus curiae. As a token of appreciation, we direct the M.P. High Court Legal Services Committee to bear his honorarium which is quantified at Rs.20,000/- ( Rupees Twenty Thousand Only).
(VIVEK AGARWAL) (AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
VSG
VIKRAM
Digitally signed by VIKRAM SINGH
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR, 2.5.4.20=5e3bf9b63759d9c0513833048a47283c8f6673287 8c5d090341a0b75ce6d1e91, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA SINGH PRADESH JABALPUR,CID - 7034821, postalCode=482001, st=Madhya Pradesh, serialNumber=fdd89e77c40ec11a8ec3aaadef0e2e7dafec93 c010d5efb1cd4a15d8a674147a, cn=VIKRAM SINGH Date: 2025.09.28 17:11:15 +05'30'