Andhra Pradesh - Man sentenced to death for killing six family members

Published on: Jun 28, 2025 11:40 am IST

The accused entered a man's house in a village of Pendurthi mandal and hacked six of his family members to death over a longstanding land dispute. A local court on Friday sentenced a 50-year-old man to death for the brutal murder of six family members in Visakhapatnam district on April 15, 2021. 

Battina Appalaraju entered the house of Bommidi Ramana in Juthada village of Pendurthi mandal and hacked six of his family members to death over a longstanding land dispute between the two families. The victims included Bommidi Ramana (63), Usharani (35), Alluri Ramadevi (53), Nakkella Aruna (37), a six-month-old infant, and a two-year-old child. After committing the murders, Appalaraju surrendered at the local police station. 

Terming it a case of "extreme brutality", the court noted that six lives, including two children, were taken in cold blood. Following the trial, the court awarded Appalaraju the death penalty. It also sentenced him to up to seven years of rigorous imprisonment under various IPC sections and imposed fines.

Source: https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/man-sentenced-to-death-for-killing-six-family-members-in-andhra-in-2021-101751090604559.html

Calcutta HC commutes death sentence of man convicted for raping and killing a minor girl

Published on June 27, 2025 

By Editor 

“Admittedly, none of the witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution has claimed to have seen the convict committing the murder of the victim. The case is entirely based upon circumstantial evidence.” 

Calcutta High Court: In a criminal revision application filed for commutation of death sentence of the appellant, who was convicted for raping and killing a minor girl, the Division Bench of MD Shabbar Rashidi* and Debangsu Basak, JJ, opined that the death penalty should be resorted to in exceptional circumstances. Accordingly, the Court commuted the death sentence of the appellant to life imprisonment without remission for 20 years.

Justice MD Shabbar Rashidi

Background 

The appellant had been convicted by the Sessions Court for offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(i)(k), 302 and 201 of the Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO), and was sentenced to death for the same. The victim was aged 14-15 years at the time of commission of offence and had been working in the appellant’s house as a maid for over two years. The de facto complainant was the maternal uncle of the victim who was informed by the appellant via telephone that the victim was seriously ill. The complainant, along with the mother of the victim, rushed to the appellant’s house. They couldn’t find her in any of the rooms of the house and ultimately found her lying dead in the bathroom. Her body was entirely charred and the complainant suspected that she had also been raped by the appellant. Accordingly, a complaint was registered at Haldia Police Station. The police registered an unnatural death case, and on completion of investigation, submitted charge sheet in the case under Sections 376 (2)(i) (k)/302/201 of IPC and Section 6 of POSCO. 

Analysis, Law, and Decision 

The Court relied on the testimony of the autopsy surgeon and the post-mortem report to conclude that the cause of death of the victim was throttling ante mortem. The Court further noted that the victim was burned post-mortem and was the prey of repeated rape. According to the Court, the evidence led at the trial made it clear that the victim was repeatedly raped, killed by throttling, and finally set ablaze in an endeavor to annihilate the evidence. The next point of consideration for the Court was to determine who was responsible for those actions. The Court noted that the victim and the appellant lived alone in his house and as per the terms of Section 106 of the Evidence Act, 1872, the appellant was under the obligation to explain the circumstances of the victim’s death. However, the appellant did not attempt to discharge that obligation, which led to an adverse inference against him. 

In light of the evidence adduced at trial, the Court opined that the appellant alone was the perpetrator of the crime. The Court stated that the chain of circumstances was complete and neatly woven to exclude the intervention of anybody other than the appellant in the commission of the offence. Accordingly, the Court did not think it fit to interfere with the trial court’s judgement and upheld the appellant’s conviction. With regards to the death penalty, the Court referred to Supreme Court pronouncements which had held that death penalty should be resorted to only in the ‘rarest of rare case’. The Supreme Court had also laid down certain parameters for determining ‘aggravating circumstances’ and ‘mitigating circumstances.’ Keeping those in mind, the Court noted that the appellant was 58 years of age and did not possess any criminal antecedent. He neither suffered from any pathological infirmity nor did he have a history of unstable mental or social behavior. 

In light of the facts and circumstances presented before it, the Court commuted the death sentence awarded to the appellant to one of life imprisonment. The Court also clarified that since the appellant is aged, the punishment of life imprisonment in his case meant imprisonment for life without remission until 20 years from the date of his arrest. 

[Srimanta Tung v. State of W.B., 2025 SCC OnLine Cal 5225, decided on 24-6-2025] 

*Judgement authored by- Justice MD Shabbar Rashidi 

Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner: Kaushik Gupta (Senior Advocate), Santanu Talukdar, Advocate. 

For the Respondent: Debasish Roy (PP), Rudradipta Nandy (APP), Suman De, Advocate.

https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2025/06/27/cal-hc-commutes-death-penalty-of-convict-who-raped-minor-girl/

Madhya Pradesh - Death penalty for man who killed wife on Holi: Ujjain Court says, 'Hang till death for firing 3 bullets over suspected affair with nephew'

On the morning of Dhulendi, March 25, 2024, Ujjain’s Wahid Lala carefully executed a horrific crime. He sent his children away to their grandmother’s house in an e-rickshaw, claiming he and their mother would follow. But instead, he intercepted his wife Sanjeeda Bi outside her aunt’s house in Adarsh Nagar and shot her dead in broad daylight.

Wahid Lala

Three bullets over suspicion Driven by suspicions of an alleged affair between his wife and his own nephew, Wahid fired three bullets—two into her stomach and one into her temple. According to ADPO Mishrilal Chaudhary, the murder was rooted in deep mistrust. Wahid, who had already served time in a separate murder case 16 years ago, once again resorted to violence.

Court orders hanging till death On Thursday, a local Ujjain court sentenced Wahid Lala to death, stating he must be hanged till death for the brutal and planned killing of his wife. District Prosecution Officer Rajendra Khandegar said the year-long trial concluded with the strongest punishment under law, citing the crime as “heinous beyond reform.”

Jail term for illegal firearm too Besides the death penalty, Wahid also received five years of rigorous imprisonment and a Rs 100 fine for illegal possession of the weapon used in the crime. The incident, which unfolded on a festival meant for colour and unity, now stands as a chilling example of what unchecked suspicion and violence can lead to.

Source: https://www.bhaskarenglish.in/local/mp/news/death-penalty-for-ujjain-man-who-killed-wife-on-holi-over-affair-suspicion-and-planned-murder-on-festival-morning-135316720.html

'An eye for an eye' is not practiced in India: Kerala High Court grants release to death row inmate

The Court ruled that even in cases where statutes prohibit parole for death row inmates, High Courts may use their authority under Article 226 of the Constitution to protect fundamental human rights.

A death row inmate was recently granted escort parole by the Kerala High Court to visit his ill 93-year-old mother. According to the High Court's ruling, the convicted individual is one of 14 individuals who were given the death punishment by a Sessions Court last year for the killing of lawyer and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Ranjith Sreenivasan. According to reports, all 14 were affiliated with the Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI) and the outlawed Popular Front of India (PFI). The High Court is still considering their appeals against their conviction and imprisonment.

Despite the fact that parole is forbidden for inmates who have received death sentences under the Kerala Prisons and Correction Services (Management) Act and the Kerala Prisons and Correction Services (Management) Rules, Justice PV Kunhikrishnan issued the decision granting parole. The Court ruled that even in cases where parole for condemned inmates is prohibited by statute, High Courts may use their authority under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution to protect fundamental human rights.

Justice PV Kunhikrishnan

The Court emphasized that India does not practice "an eye for an eye" or other forms of retributive retribution. However, a court of law cannot adopt an inhumane stance similar to that of the prisoner who abandoned the victim's family. Retributive punishment, such as "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth," is not practiced in India. Our nation is renowned for upholding justice while demonstrating empathy, humanity, and compassion. The constitutional court has an obligation to ensure that a prisoner's basic rights and requirements are upheld until the end of the sentence, the court declared.

Additionally, it noted that as the Indian legal system is not based on retributive punishment, courts must exercise their discretion when it comes to showing compassion. "Justice is not justice without the gentle touch of humanity, empathy, and compassion. However, the Court stated that humanity, empathy, and compassion are questions of judicial discretion that must be applied in light of each case's unique facts and circumstances. The constitutional court has an obligation to ensure that a prisoner's basic rights and needs are upheld until the end of the term. 

The convict's wife submitted the petition, contesting the prison administration's repeated denial of their requests for emergency parole. In addition to offering to pay for the escort, the petitioner had provided medical data attesting to the convict's mother's precarious health. Prison officials, however, denied the petitions, citing Rule 339(2) of the Rules and Section 42 of the Kerala Prisons and Correctional Services (Management) Act, 2010 as reasons for not allowing escort visits or emergency parole for inmates awaiting execution.

The petitioner argued that the High Court might use its authority under Article 226 on humanitarian grounds and grant her husband parole to visit his mother, who is entirely bedridden, even if the legislation did not allow parole in such circumstances. Although the convict's offense was serious and his acts had caused the victim's family much anguish, the court pointed out that the legal system couldn't take a strictly punitive stance.

"When the prisoner, who is a condemned prisoner waiting for death sentence submit before this Court that he want to see his mother, who is in a sinking stage, this Court cannot shut its eye, even though he was inhuman to the deceased and his relatives, when he committed the murder, which is found as true by the trial court," the Court stated in its ruling. Retributive punishment, such as "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth," is not practiced in India.

After obtaining a certified copy of its ruling, the Court decided it was appropriate to use its extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution and mandated that the convicted individual be placed on escort parole within three days.

The Court further mandated that the convicted individual be permitted to spend a minimum of six hours with his mother while being closely monitored by the police, with the District Police Chief of Thiruvananthapuram City overseeing the arrangements.

Advocates KS Madhusoodanan, MM Vinod Kumar, PK Rakesh Kumar, KS Mizver, MJ Kirankumar, and Shaiq Rasal M. represented the petitioner.

Source: https://lawread.in/an-eye-for-an-eye-is-not-practiced-in-india-kerala-high-court-grants-release-to-death-row-inmate

Andhra's Chittoor court awards death sentence to five in murder of ex-mayor and her husband

CHITTOOR: 

The VI Additional District and Sessions Court, Chittoor, awarded the death sentence to five accused (A1 to A5) in the sensational murder case of former Chittoor mayor Katari Anuradha and her husband Mohan in 2015. Sriram Chandrasekhar alias Chintu (A1), Venkatachalapathi alias Mulabagal Venkatesh (A2), Jaya Prakash Reddy (A3), Manjunath (A4), and M Venkatesu (A5), were brought to the court from the Chittoor district jail for the double murder case trial.

Venkatachalapathi alias Mulabagal Venkatesh (A2)

After hearing the arguments of the prosecution and the defence counsel, and examining the witnesses, the court delivered the verdict on Friday. All the five accused were found guilty under the IPC Section 120B for criminal conspiracy in executing the double murder. The five accused were awarded the death sentence under the IPC Section 302 read with 120B for the murder of Anuradha and Mohan. A fine of Rs 70 lakh was imposed on Chintu, and of which Rs 50 lakh would to be paid to the family of the deceased couple, and Rs 20 lakh to Veluri Satish Kumar Naidu (PW 1), who was injured in the attack. 

Section 144 in Chittoor to deter violence

On November 17, 2015, Chintu and Venkatesh, along with three others, entered the Chittoor Municipal Corporation office disguised in burqas, and murdered Anuradha and her husband. Firearms and lethal weapons were used in the double murder. Property dispute was found to be the motive behind the double murder. Chittoor police identified 24 suspects in the double murder case, and filed a chargesheet against 23 on February 18, 2016. K Ramesh (A22) was acquitted after being found not guilty, while S Srinivasachari (A21) died during the case trial.

(From right) Sriram Chandrasekhar, Venkatachalapathi, Manjunath, Jayaprakash Reddy, and Venkatesh, who were awarded death by hanging, in Chittoor on Friday. | Photo Credit: The Hindu

Over the decade-long trial, the court examined 57 witnesses, whose testimonies proved crucial in awarding the capital punishment to the quintet. As a precautionary measure, Section 144 was imposed in Chittoor town to prevent any untoward incident after the proclamation of death sentence to the five accused in the double murder case. Chittoor police have appealed to citizens to maintain peace.

Source: https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/India/andhras-chittoor-court-awards-death-sentence-to-five-in-murder-of-ex-mayor-husband/ar-AA1PBxTp?apiversion=v2&domshim=1&noservercache=1&noservertelemetry=1&batchservertelemetry=1&renderwebcomponents=1&wcseo=1

One sentenced to death 18 others get life term for man's murder in Bengal's Hooghly district

June 24, 2025 16:37 IST

Kolkata, Jun 24 (PTI) A sessions court in West Bengal’s Hooghly district on Tuesday sentenced a person to death and 18 others to life imprisonment for the murder of a man during a school committee election in 2011. The Arambagh additional district and sessions judge sentenced Baladev Pal to death and 18 others to life imprisonment for the murder of Nayeemuddin Sheikh.

The court found Pal's actions falling in the rarest of rare category and awarded him the capital punishment, public prosecutor Sankar Ganguly said. He said the state had prayed before the court that Pal be awarded the maximum punishment for the murder. Sheikh was shot dead during a violent altercation related to a school governing body election in the Arambagh subdivision in 2011.

His widow had filed a complaint at Goghat police station against 30 people for the murder of her husband.

While four accused died during the trial, the court found 19 accused guilty of the crime. Sheikh's widow expressed satisfaction at the sentence awarded to the guilty persons. The lawyers for the convicted men said that they would appeal before the Calcutta High Court, challenging the conviction.

(This story has not been edited by THE WEEK and is auto-generated from PTI)

Source: https://www.theweek.in/wire-updates/national/2025/06/24/lgc1-wb-court-death.html

MP HC Commutes Death Sentence in Brutal Rape of 4-Yr-Old, Citing Youth, Reform

By - Sakshi | 23 June 2025 3:43 PM 

While upholding the conviction, the High Court observed that the “act of the appellant was barbaric” but not “brutal” to the degree that would warrant capital punishment In a deeply disturbing case involving sexual assault and attempted murder of a 4-year-old girl, the Madhya Pradesh High Court recently commuted the death sentence awarded to the 20-year-old convict Rajaram, converting it to 25 years of rigorous imprisonment under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO). The judgment was passed by a Division Bench comprising Justice Vivek Agarwal and Justice Devnarayan Mishra.  While upholding the conviction, the High Court observed that the “act of the appellant was barbaric” but not “brutal” to the degree that would warrant capital punishment. The Court noted that although the convict committed a heinous crime upon a child aged just 4 years and 3 months, kidnapping her, sexually assaulting her and leaving her for dead, there was no medical evidence establishing permanent disability.  "...no doubt that appellant's act was brutal as he has committed rape upon the victim of four years and three months of age and after committing rape also throttled her treating her dead and thrown the victim in such a place where she could not be searched and left the spot but it is also clear that he has not committed brutality...", Court said. The bench cited absence of prior criminal history, the convict’s young age, tribal background, and lack of education as mitigating factors against imposition of the death penalty. 

"The background of the appellant is that he is uneducated youth of 20 years of age and belongs to the tribal community and his parents never tried to give him education and not properly take care of him, therefore he has left his house and was self bread earner and living and working in a Dhaba (Restaurant). Atmosphere in the Dhaba is not such, by which it can be inferred that he was given the proper atmosphere to grow up...", Court added. The bench relied heavily on the principles laid down in Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab and reaffirmed in Bhagirath @ Bhaggi v. State of MP (2024), particularly the rarest of rare doctrine, to strike a balance between aggravating and mitigating circumstances. Trial court’s sentence of death under Section 6 POCSO Act was therefore altered to 25 years of incarceration along with a fine of Rs.10,000 and an additional year’s imprisonment in default. 

Brief Background 

The crime occurred on the night of October 30–31, 2022, in District Khandwa. The 4-year-old victim had come to her relative's home for the Dussehra holidays. While sleeping inside a hut with a young cousin, the child was abducted after the convict, a local dhaba worker, requested a cot to sleep outside the house. The next morning, both the victim and the accused were found missing. Upon his arrest and disclosure, the unconscious and injured child was recovered from a mango orchard. 

The trial court convicted Rajaram under the following provisions: 

• Section 6, POCSO Act (aggravated penetrative sexual assault), 
• Section 307 IPC (attempt to murder), 
• Section 363 IPC (kidnapping), 
• Section 450 IPC (house-trespass in order to commit offence punishable with imprisonment for life), 
• Section 201 IPC (causing disappearance of evidence of offence). 

Initially, he was sentenced to death under POCSO and given additional terms of rigorous imprisonment and fines under IPC offences. Medical examinations confirmed sexual assault, with injuries including a 5 cm deep perineal tear and strangulation marks. Doctors from Bombay Hospital later noted complications such as urinary infection, brain swelling due to oxygen deprivation, and swelling near the spine. Crucially, the DNA profile from the convict matched with samples recovered from the victim’s frock, undergarments, and bodily swabs, as well as from the convict’s own clothing recovered from a sugarcane field and mango orchard. Though acknowledging the gravity and depravity of the offence, the High Court found that the case did not meet the “rarest of rare” threshold required for death penalty. The Bench reiterated that life imprisonment is the rule and death is an exception, and that the possibility of reform and the convict’s socio-economic background must be considered. The appeal was partly allowed, the reference for confirmation of death sentence was answered in the negative, and the case property was ordered to be dealt with per trial court directions. 

Case Title: Rajaram @ Raj Kumar v. State of MP & Ors.

Source: 

https://lawbeat.in/news-updates/mp-hc-commutes-death-sentence-in-brutal-rape-of-4-yr-old-citing-youth-reform-1490931

Uttarakhand - Man gets death sentence for killing Dalit teen for rejecting advances

Summary

A man was sentenced to death in June 2025 by a court in Roorkee, Uttarakhand, India, for the 2021 murder of a Dalit teenager (Nidhi) who had rejected his advances.

The primary accused, Haider, was given the death penalty, while an accomplice, Shariq, received life imprisonment. A third individual, (name withheld), was a minor at the time and is facing trial in a juvenile court.

Details of the Case:

Crime: In April 2021, Haider and his associates entered the victim's home while she was alone and attacked her, slitting her throat with a knife.

Motive: The attack occurred after the victim's brother had confronted Haider and warned him to stay away following instances of sexual harassment.

Arrest and Verdict: Locals caught Haider at the scene and handed him over to the police. The court, in its verdict, convicted him of murder and other charges. The case was considered a "rarest of the rare" case to justify capital punishment.

This is one of several recent cases where individuals have received death sentences or life imprisonment for crimes involving the murder of Dalit individuals, often in the context of caste prejudice, "honour killings", or sexual violence.

Source: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/dehradun/man-gets-death-sentence-for-killing-dalit-teen-for-rejecting-advances/articleshow/121808525.cms#:~:text=Viswashkumar%20Ramesh,us%20even%20a%20single%20rupee.%22

Calcutta High Court commutes death sentence of man who stabbed ex-girlfriend 45 times, cites ‘rarest of the rare’ doctrine

13 June, 2025

OpIndia Staff

Opinion piece: summary

Calcutta High Court (via wikimedia)

Summary with Key Facts

• On 11 June, the Calcutta High Court commuted the death sentence of Susanta Chowdhury to life imprisonment without remission for 40 years from the date of his arrest.

• Chowdhury was convicted of murdering his 21-year-old former girlfriend by stabbing her 45 times in May 2022 while she was returning from a movie.

• The High Court bench of Justices Debangsu Basak and Md Shabbar Rashidi held that the case did not fall under the “rarest of the rare” category and noted a possibility of reformation.

• The court considered factors such as absence of prior criminal record, the crime arising from personal animosity, and the prosecution’s failure to prove that the act was intended to create public fear.

Other Similar Cases Mentioned

• April (Supreme Court): Death penalty of a man who killed his wife and four children and raped his daughter was commuted to life imprisonment, citing improved conduct, childhood trauma, and no criminal history.

• December 2024 (Chhattisgarh High Court): Death sentence of a man convicted of killing his wife and three children was commuted as the case was not “rarest of the rare.”

• April 2023 (Supreme Court): Death sentence of a man who murdered his sister and her lover was converted to life imprisonment, noting good behavior and lack of criminal mindset.

Bengal: POCSO court sentences man to death for rape, murder of minor

11 June 2025, 13:13 IST

Noting that the victim was of the same age as the accused's daughter, the judge observed that the crime falls under the rarest of rare category. 

Jalpaiguri (WB): A special Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) court awarded death sentence to Haripada Roy for the rape and murder of a minor girl in West Bengal's Jalpaiguri district. Jalpaiguri special POCSO  court judge Rintu Sur also directed the district legal services authority to pay Rs 5 lakh compensation to the victim's family. He was also sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 5,000 for destroying evidence. The 11-year-old girl was abducted from in front of her house by the accused before raping and murdering her on September 29, 2023, prosecution lawyer Debasish Dutta said. 

Haripada Roy (Social Media: FB)

The lawyer said that since the panchayat board was being formed on that day, most of the villagers went there, including the victim's father and uncle. After they returned, the girl's mother told them that she had been missing since 2 pm, and when she was not found after an extensive search, the uncle lodged a missing complaint at Dhupguri police station in Jalpaiguri district. The body of the girl was found in a sack near a local river a few days later. A post mortem examination of the body revealed that she had been raped and strangulated to death, Dutta added. The accused, a neighbour, was arrested following statements by locals that the girl was seen entering his house, followed by the recovery of evidence, the prosecution lawyer said.

Source: https://www.deccanherald.com/india/west-bengal/bengal-pocso-court-sentences-man-to-death-for-rape-murder-of-minor-3581038

Man accused in rape and murder of minor girl sentenced to death in Chandigarh

Story by Aman Kumar Bhardwaj

Chandigarh's Fast Track Special Court on Tuesday sentenced a 41-year-old man to death for raping and murdering an eight-year-old girl in the city. This is the first case of a death sentence being pronounced for a crime in Chandigarh. The convict, Heera Lal, alias Guddu, was a neighbour of the victim and had raped and murdered the girl by slitting her throat and stabbing her. The victim went missing on January 19 and a search was launched following a missing complaint by her family members. Her body was recovered from a heap of garbage near her home in Hallomajra on the intervening nights of January 21 and January 22, 2024.

A post-mortem report revealed that she was raped and murdered. Following this, an investigation was launched and the girl's slippers were recovered from a neighbouring house, whose resident, Hira Lal, was missing. Police identified the accused from CCTV footage and he was arrested in Bihar after seven days.

According to police, the accused had come to Chandigarh from Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh and was living in the victim's neighbourhood. A chargesheet was filed against the accused after further investigations revealed that he was behind the rape and murder. The court framed charges against the accused under sections 201, 302, 363, 366, 376, 376(3), 376 AB and 511 and section 6 of the POCSO Act and the court convicted the accused on the basis of DNA reports and other evidence.

Source: https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/other/man-accused-in-rape-and-murder-of-minor-girl-sentenced-to-death-in-chandigarh/ar-AA1G1Ogw