Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

33. The entire transaction of rape and murder was a single one committed by both these accused. They both participated actively. It appears that while one strangulated her the other knifed her. They both raped her. At any rate they helped each other in the entire process of rape and murder. It is a case of gang rape and murder thereafter. We do not know which one of them had strangulated her and which one had stabbed. But they both participated fully. Both of them thus committed offence punishable under Section 376(2)(g) and Section 302, Indian Penal Code in the alternative Section 302/34, Indian Penal Code. We find that the trial Court has rightly convicted them for the offence.

35. The only other question is whether they deserve the sentences of death or not. We have noticed from evidence, all the circumstances of rape and murder. The accused persons at the relevant time were expected to look after the girl. Her father had left her under their care. They were expected to look after her, as their father. Instead they raped and killed her and threw her body in the septic tank. She tried to protect herself but as a weak female how much could she resist. Molai was a guard at the workshop where Somvanshi was incharge. He had the faith of Somvanshi. This is how he took advantage of that faith. Santosh was undergoing imprisonment on charge of earlier rape. He says that he had been acquitted by the High Court of that charge. It is immaterial. But that shows what type of character he is. Somvanshi put faith in him but he raped and murdered his daughter. This rape and murder is extremely abhorring and shocking to the conscience and to society. It has been committed in cold blood. There was no cause for provocation against the family or against the girl. Their action was abhorring demonic, brutal, beastly cruel and depicts abysmal depravity and murder in cold blood.

(g) Kamta Tiwari v. State of M.P., cited 1996 (6) SCC 250. It was a case of rape and murder of 7 year old girl. The appellant had kidnapped the deceased, committed rape on her and strangulated her to death and threw the body in a well. It was held that in the circumstances of the case, the accused deserves death sentence. Again deterrent and retributive aspects of punishment were applied. It was held that this case was a rarest of rare case where sentence of death was eminently desirable, not only to deter others from committing such atrocious crimes, but also to give emphatical expression to society's abhorrence of such crimes.

40. The case before us is pan materia to case of Kamta Tiwari v. State of M. P. We are also reminded of abduction, rape and murder of Chopra children in Delhi by 2 accused persons i.e. Billa and Ranga after kidnapping them while they were on way to participating in some radio programme and made the mistake of seeking lift from the two accused who were going in a car. In spite of resistance, both were over-powered and girl was raped and both the children Were done to death in a cruel manner in a sprawling garden of Delhi. The Supreme Court confirmed the death sentence in that case on both the accused. That case is cited as Kuljeet Singh v. Union of India, AIR 1981 SC 1572. The present is no less heinous cruel. The accused have not been able to show any mitigating circumstance whatsoever.