The Tandoor diary (Delhi)

Saturday, 10 March 2018 | Saatvik Jha

Retired policeman Maxwell Pereira fleshes out one of India’s most horrific killings after 22 years, Saatvik Jhalistens in.

Retired policeman Maxwell Pereira

For a generation raised on Agatha Christie and Conan Doyle, Maxwell Pereira presents Indian readers with a real-life ‘whodunnit’, straight from the heart of the capital city,” declared veteran journalist Rajdeep Sardesai while introducing The Tandoor Murder. The book chronicles Naina Sahni’s gruesome murder at the hands of her husband, Sushil Sharma, early in July 1995. A Congress youth leader and MlA, Sharma was primed for a meteoric rise in the political sphere. “Had I not murdered her I would have been a union minister today,” lamented Sharma to a colleague of Sardesai’s back when the UPA government was still in power. Suspecting his wife of infidelity, Sharma shot her with a revolver while enraged. This became pretext for the politician's defence of his act as ‘a crime of passion’. In an attempt to cover his tracks, Sahni’s body was chopped up by Sharma and set ablaze in a tandoor at Baghiya restaurant — giving the case its notorious title.

Most readers first encountered Pereira’s writing at a Times of India column called ‘The Middle’, published literally in the middle of the newspaper. “Witty, ironical, irreverent, Pereira was a skilled writer. The spark he showed in his ‘Middles’ has became a flame in this book,” remarks Sardesai. Having sampled the book beforehand, the journalist expresses incredulity at the attention to detail present in the chronicle. Upon inquiry, Pereira disclosed the secret behind the vivid details preserved in his book, despite being published 22 years after. “As it turns out,” reveals Sardesai, “the book was written at the time of the murders itself! Fresh from the eyes of Pereira, the investigating officer, the Tandoor Murder is a real page turner.” Sushil Sharma was sentenced to life imprisonment by the Supreme Court in October 2013, commuted from the death sentences passed by lower courts. Previously unpublished in interest of fair trial, Pereira’s gripping chronicle was read out loud in Sardesai’s resounding voice to the audience gathered at the book launch.

Sushil Sharma

Before exiting the stage, Sardesai observed how the Tandoor case was distinct when viewed from the lens of 2018. “Sharma was a relatively powerful politician, photographed with even more powerful politicians. Yet, Sushil Sharma was viewed as a criminal, not a politician. In today’s age, this would inevitably have become a Congress versus BJP tussle,” noted Sardesai to a round of laughter from the gathering. “Private news television had just emerged then, growing slowly,” continued Sardesai, counting the news channels present in 1995 on his fingertips, “This put the Tandoor Murder before the ‘breaking news’ era. The media didn’t broadcast the lurid details of Naina and Sushil’s lives to the public. Thus, one could say the Tandoor Murder occurred in an age of innocence.” No one has written about the Tandoor case in such vivid detail hitherto, and nor was it possible for anyone else to produce such a work. Sardesai sealed the stamp on the novelty of Pereira’s book, concluding, “Pereira’s is a book for the age of the breaking news era about a story from the pre-breaking news age.”

Sardesai’s enthralling introduction was followed by a panel discussion, featuring Pereira in conversation with journalists Rini Simon Khanna and Sunetra Choudhury. Early on, Choudhury highlighted, “The media was very much a part of the Tandoor case.” Pereira’s responses corroborated this instantly: “Influenced by tabloid media, the forensic specialist in-charge ruled out the possibility of firearms being used on Sahni’s body. This created yet another hurdle for us in establishing Sharma’s culpability — representative of the problems faced by Indian policemen.” On that note, Pereira added, “There’s a great lesson to all investigative officers in this book: how important the links are.” It appears the police in India are often content to merely have traced the origins of a crime after due investigation. Pereira’s remarks pointed out that frequent negligence in duly documenting all the links and evidence caused a lot of solved cases to see culprits walking scot-free once the matter reached criminal courts.

Choudhury went on to ask, “Sushil Sharma has behaved really well during his internment, lobbying now for release after 22 years. Would you support itIJ” With this, discussion had reached an inevitable juncture. As is often the case in Indian polity, the definition of life imprisonment — Sharma’s sentence — is not taken on face value by many. The Criminal Procedure Code provides for state governments to remit life sentences to a shorter duration, a minimum of 14 years. In the face of rising maintenance costs, many state governments exploited this feature to remit all life imprisonments under their ambit in this manner. Such widespread malpractice had, in earlier years, given rise to the misconception that all life sentences are a duration of 14 years. Such misuse of the provision has, to some degree, abated. However, it remains a continued practice to reduce life sentences on a case-to-case basis. “It’s a tradition in Tihar jail [where Sharma lies imprisoned] to not detain an inmate for more than 25 years,” mentioned Pereira. Sunetra interviewed Sharma while writing Behind Bars: Prison Tales of India’s Most Famous. In this context, she expressed sympathy towards the pleas of a man who has spent over two decades imprisoned. Alas, the panel conceded that no conclusion could be reached on the matter until the courts give their verdict on Sharma’s appeal.

The outcomes of this case were two-pronged. For her part, Choudhury prudently observed that Naina Sahni was often vilified in the media outcry that ensued after the murder. “Vilification of the woman victim remains a consistent aspect of crimes committed in India till date,” said an exasperated Choudhury while recounting similar instances. Adding to Choudhury, Pereira exclaimed, “One needn’t even go as far as murder. Every time a rape is discussed on television news, one or the other party unfailingly finds faults in the victim.” Pereira went on to elaborate on the other major outcome, “Criminalisation of politics, which became a feature of this case, has not changed.” In 2018, nearly half the cabinet and over a hundred MP’s have criminal records. Thusly expressed, the outcomes mentioned serve to render the Tandoor case into a lynchpin of features which have gone on to characterise crime in India. “We are complacent,” said Pereira wistfully, “nobody cares about crime until it comes knocking on their door.”

Source: https://www.dailypioneer.com/2018/vivacity/the-tandoor-diary.html (Accessed 24 December 2018)

High court takes killer off gallows (Orissa)

By Lalmohan Patnaik in Cuttack

Published 18.01.18

Cuttack: Orissa High Court has converted the death sentence awarded to a murder accused to life imprisonment after two division bench judges differed over capital punishment awarded by trial court.

The final verdict came after the matter had been placed before five judges - first a two judge bench, then a single judge bench - and then again, a two judge bench. The trial court convicted and sentenced to death Banabihari Behera, 35, a truck driver, on August 27, 2014, for killing a 16-year-old girl, who was then a first-year student of intermediate science. The incident occurred at Tomka village on April 26, 2013. As the court had ordered capital punishment, the judgment was sent for confirmation to the high court.

But when judges of a division bench delivered two judgments on the trial court verdict, the matter was laid before a single judge bench. While pronouncing the judgment on November 19, 2015, both the judges of the division bench upheld Banabihari's conviction. However, on the question of sentence, there was a difference of opinion. While one of the judges confirmed the death sentence, the other judge said appropriate punishment in the case was life imprisonment.

In such background, the matter was placed before a third judge, who on December 7, 2017, opined for commutation of death sentence to imprisonment for life. Subsequently, the matter was again placed before a two judge division bench for confirmation. The two judges discharged the death reference. "In view of the opinion expressed by a majority of two judges, this court disposes of the death reference and jail criminal appeal commuting the death sentence awarded to the convict, Banabihari Behera, to one of life imprisonment," the division bench of Justice Indrajit Mohanty and Justice Biswajit Mohanty ruled in its January 2 order.

"The award of sentence of fine of Rs 50,000 and in default in making payment of the same, the direction to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years more, remains undisturbed," the order said. Earlier, while opining for commuting death sentence to life imprisonment, the singlejudge bench had said: "The appellant, a bachelor was by avocation a driver of the truck, having the members of the family needing his support and he has no such criminal track record to his credit." "The crime as committed does not appear to be premeditated which is again a mitigating factor," the single judge bench said in its order.

Source: https://www.telegraphindia.com/states/odisha/high-court-takes-killer-off-gallows/cid/1406206 (Accessed 24 December 2018)

HC commutes death sentence of 2 in triple murder case (Tamil Nadu)

Chennai, Oct 25 (PTI) The Madras High Court today commuted the death sentence awarded to two persons in a triple murder for gain case to life imprisonment.

A bench comprising Justice PN Prakash and Justice C V Karthikeyan, however, made it clear that the convicts — Kamaraj and Elangovan — shall not be released unless they complete 30 years of actual imprisonment without any statutory remission or commutation. The bench passed the orders on the appeal filed by the two accused and also referred a trial by the lower court for confirmation of the death sentence. Kamaraj and Elangovan were sentenced to death by the additional district and sessions court in Namakkal for murdering a woman doctor, her mother and her daughter at their house in Mullai Nagar on October 13, 2011, and looting gold jewellery.

The court had also awarded double life imprisonment and 10 years of rigorous imprisonment (RI) each to the two accused for offences, including robbery. Another person was also allegedly involved in the crime but he died before the commencement of trial and therefore charges against him were abated. In its order, the bench said that on the basis of the guidelines given by the Supreme Court in various judgements, it was clear that the high court should also consider the mitigating circumstances surrounding the accused. Taking note that Kamaraj had two children and Elangovan a child, the bench said it should also keep in mind that these children do not have any anger or any reason to wreak vengeance in any manner whatsoever when they grow up and enter the society.

“To this extent, we feel that it would only be appropriate that an alternative to death sentence can be imposed on Kamaraj and Elangovan,” it said. Upholding the conviction for murder, the bench modified the death sentence to imprisonment for life. The sentence of 10 years RI for robbery and the double life imprisonments would run consecutively. The accused shall first undergo the RI and then life imprisonments concurrently. The bench also expressed hope that the two accused would reform themselves.

It requested the District Legal Services Authority to ensure that the children of the accused continue their school education and also guide their wives, if in some way qualified, in moving forward in life. These positive initiatives taken by the court would propel the accused to reform themselves and when they come out of prison, they would be useful to society at least in extolling virtues of a crime-free life, the order said.

This is published unedited from the PTI feed.

Source: https://www.india.com/news/agencies/hc-commutes-death-sentence-of-2-in-triple-murder-case-2564775/ (Accessed 23 December 2018)

HC commutes death sentence of serial killer in one case (Karnataka)

Published: October 12, 2017 10:47 PM IST

Bengaluru, Oct 12 (PTI) The Karnataka High Court today commuted the death penalty given to a serial killer by a trial court in a murder case of a woman to imprisonment till death.

A division bench of Justice Ravi Mallimath and Justice John Michael D’Cunha commuted the sentence of Mohan Kumar alias ‘Cyanide’ Mohan, who faced charges of killing a number of women between 2003 and 2009. He was sentenced to death in three cases. The court passed the order on the matter referred to it by the trial court for confirmation of the death penalty for killing a woman in a public toilet in Hassan in June, 2009.

The judges held that the prosecution failed to present evidence for the rape and abduction charges against Kumar. According to the prosecution, Kumar allegedly used to lure women to marry him and take them to hotels. Later, he would kill them by giving them birth control pills laced with cyanide. He was caught after the June incident.

The call details of the woman helped police in cracking the case. Police officials were shocked when Kumar, during interrogation, gave chilling details of the murders he had committed. Police had considered those cases as suicide or natural death. The fourth additional district and session’s judge of Mangaluru B K Naik had awarded Kumar the capital punishment in the 2009 murder case, calling it it the rarest of the rare. Kumar faced charges of killing 20 women but was convicted in four cases by the trial court. Out of the four, he was given the death sentence in three and life term in the other.

Mohan Kumar alias ‘Cyanide’ Mohan

The 2009 case had come up before the high court for confirmation of the death penalty. Kumar had filed an appeal against the death sentences and appeared before the high court as the party in person, one who argues his case on his own. He contended that in none of the cases, rape was established and urged the court to commute the punishment to life imprisonment.

Allowing his plea, the court held that the accused had not physically tortured the victim in the present case. Hence, it ordered imprisonment till his death. The court directed jail authorities not to release him as he will not be entitled for remission.

This is published unedited from the PTI feed.

Source: https://www.india.com/news/agencies/hc-commutes-death-sentence-of-serial-killer-in-one-case-2530374/ (Accessed 23 December 2018)

HC commutes man’s death penalty to life term in double murder case (Tamil Nadu)

September 17, 2017 1:15 AM IST

By PTI Feeds

Chennai, Sep 16 (PTI) The Madras High Court has commuted the death sentence awarded by a Tirupur court to one of the five accused in a double murder case to life imprisonment.

A division bench of justices PN Prakash and CV Karthikeyan yesterday commuted the death sentence awarded by the Tirupur Mahila Court to Selvam alias Koolai Selvam to life term. It also slapped a fine of Rs 5,000 on the convict and said if he failed to pay the amount, he would have to undergo another year of rigorous imprisonment. The two prison terms would run consecutively and not concurrently, the court said.

The court said there was no evidence against another accused, Rangaraj, who too was awarded death penalty by the lower court, and acquitted him of all the charges. The court, which also set free two other accused in the case — Nagaraj and Anandan — however, upheld the life sentence of another accused, Deivasigamani. According to the prosecution, a dispute had arisen between Selvam and one Thangavelu over a financial transaction in 2015 and subsequently, the latter was killed by a gang, led by the former.

Investigations revealed that both Thangavelu and his daughter, Mahalakshmi, were burnt to death at different places under the Mangalam police station limits in Tirupur and Vadavalli police station limits in Coimbatore, by the gang. Reducing the sentence, the bench said, “Insofar as Selvam (A1) is concerned, the sentencing must address his concerns in relation to judicial discretion and there must be an equal treatment of similarly situated convicts.” It observed that though it held Selvam guilty of the murders of Thangavelu and Mahalakshmi, the question which had to be addressed was, whether his act warranted capital punishment or whether life imprisonment, “which would act not only as a retribution for his crime, but also, to some extent, hopefully reform him”, would be sufficient.

“However, had this motive been removed or had this entire incident not surfaced in the life of Selvam, the court should also ask the question whether he would still have pushed himself to commit a grisly crime of murder. “If the answer is ‘yes’, then certainly, he would deserve capital punishment, but, if there is a doubt that he might not have exhibited the same conduct, then it is only just that the court also recognises the fact and awards him life imprisonment,” it said.

This is published unedited from the PTI feed.

Supreme Court stays execution of man on death row (Uttar Pradesh)

By PTI |New Delhi |Published: August 13, 2017 9:07:34 am

In its judgement, the high court had held that Madan and his associates had indiscriminately fired upon the victims and considering the gravity of offence, it was covered under the category of the rarest of rare cases warranting death penalty.

The Supreme Court has stayed the execution of a man sentenced to death in a case related to election rivalry in which six persons were murdered after panchayat polls in Uttar Pradesh in 2003. A bench comprising Justices Dipak Misra, Amitava Roy and A M Khanwilkar admitted the appeal filed by convict Madan and called for the trial court’s records of the case lodged in Muzaffarnagar district. “Leave granted. Let the lower court’s records be called for. 

There shall be a stay on the execution of the death sentence,” it said. Madan was awarded the capital punishment by the trial court in July 2015 and the sentence was confirmed by the Allahabad High Court in February this year. The high court, while confirming his death sentence, had observed that he was one of the main assailants in the crime in which six persons had died. The high court had commuted to life term the death penalty awarded by the trial court to another convict in the case. According to the prosecution, Madan, along with his associates, had fired at the family members and supporters of the successful candidates, who were elected as members of a village panchayat.

It had alleged that Madan and others were supporting the other candidate, who had lost the election, due to which he had a grudge against them. The prosecution had said that on October 14, 2003, when the relatives and supporters of the successful candidates were going to the house of deputy pradhan of the village, Madan and his associates attacked them and in the firing six people had died. During the trial, Madan and others had denied the allegations levelled against them and had claimed that they were falsely implicated in the case due to election rivalry. In its judgement, the high court had held that Madan and his associates had indiscriminately fired upon the victims and considering the gravity of offence, it was covered under the category of thhe rarest of rare cases warranting death penalty.

Source: https://indianexpress.com/article/india/up-muzaffarnagar-supreme-court-stays-execution-of-man-on-death-row-4794480/ (Accessed 23 December 2018)

Delhi: Gangster out on parole murders rival

TNN | Jul 8, 2017, 02.35 AM IST 

NEW DELHI: A year after his death sentence was converted into life, a gangster released on parole returned to head his gang. Ajay Barwala eliminated one of his rivals outside the latter’s house in Najafgarh. He was arrested on Thursday night near Lajpat Nagar while he was on his way to settle scores with another rival. Barwala, an associate of gangster Anil Bhagte who was shot during an encounter last year, was arrested in 2009 by the Special Cell for possession of an illegal pistol. 

One of his associates, Ajaybir, had personal rivalry with a gang in Bahadurgarh that had killed his brother. Out on bail, Barwala, with Ajaybir, went to Bahadurgarh and killed four men in a day. Both Barwala and Ajaybir were awarded death, which was later converted into life sentence by the Punjab and Haryana high court. He got a parole in 2015 for his brother’s marriage and absconded. In 2016, he murdered his earlier business partner, Devender Rathi, and tried to kill his brother-in-law Manjeet who survived. A team was formed after the police were informed that Barwala would come to Lajpat Nagar to meet an associate, said Romil Baaniya, DCP, southeast. 

Barwala was wanted by the Delhi and Haryana police in several cases of murder, attempt to murder, extortion and kidnapping for ransom.

Source: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/gangster-out-on-parole-murders-rival/articleshowprint/59497113.cms (Accessed 23 December 2018)

Delhi HC sets aside President’s order rejecting mercy plea of death-row convict (Chhattisgarh)

Jun 29, 2017 07:33 IST

Soibam Rocky Singh

New Delhi, Hindutan Times

This judgment is an embarrassment for the President’s office, which acts on the aid and advice of the Union home ministry in deciding mercy pleas.

The Delhi high court set aside on Wednesday the President’s order rejecting the mercy plea of a death-row convict and reduced his sentence to life term. The court order follows a petition filed by the advocate of convicted dacoit Sonu Sardar, who killed five members of a family, including two children, during a robbery in Chhattisgarh’s Cher village in 2004. A division bench of justices GS Sistani and Vinod Goel said the presidential order rejecting the convict’s appeal for clemency was vitiated. “The mercy petition was processed in an extremely cavalier and casual fashion by the state government at all stages, right up to placing the note for the governor,” the court said.

This judgment is an embarrassment for the President’s office, which acts on the aid and advice of the Union home ministry in deciding mercy pleas. The Supreme Court too has commuted death sentences, holding delay and not taking into account relevant factors in deciding mercy pleas as reasons for reducing the punishment. Dacoit Sardar was sentenced to death in 2008 by a trial court and the Chhattisgarh high court upheld the verdict. The Supreme Court too stood by the two lower courts in February 2012. His mercy petition was dismissed by the state government and the President in May 2014. In February 2015, the apex court rejected his review plea.

Sonu Sardar

The convict then moved the Delhi high court against the decision of the Chhattisgarh government and the President. In its order, the high court said: “The relevant considerations of the mitigating circumstances, recommendation of the jail superintendent and the young age of the petitioner were not placed before the governor depriving him of the opportunity to exercise his power in a fair and just manner.” The court noted that there were “numerous discrepancies and falsities” in the affidavits filed by the Chhattisgarh government. It further remarked that the “supervening circumstance of solitary confinement coupled with the non-placement of relevant considerations and considering of extraneous considerations has vitiated the decision of the governor and the President”.

Sardar was kept in solitary confinement for five years, which the court said violated his fundamental rights. “This court, being the sentinel of the Constitution, is bound to intervene and give relief to the petitioner,” it added. Also, the court made it clear that “life imprisonment means (till the) end of one’s life”.

Source: https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/delhi-hc-sets-aside-president-s-order-rejecting-mercy-plea-of-death-row-convict/story-vGWeRGerBjLBRC85YW4jAL.html (Accessed 23 December 2018).

High court commutes capital punishment to life (Maharashtra)

TNN | Mar 26, 2017, 12.01 AM IST 

AURANGABAD: The Aurangabad bench of the Bombay high court has set aside the capital punishment awarded to a 32-year-old man for murdering his wife in 2014 and commuted his sentence to 30 years of imprisonment. The court acquitting three others in the case. On the intervening night of July 24 and 25 in 2014, Nitin Balkisan Gaikwad, who worked as a driver, murdered his wife, Pranitha, by stabbing her 21 times at the staff quarters of the Dhule-based Agricultural College. After Gaikwad did not report to duty, college employees went to their residence to check on them and found the door locked from inside. On breaking open the door, they found Gaikwad and his wife in a pool of blood. Police also recovered a suspected suicide note by him, blaming Pranitha’s father for taking a loan of Rs 7 lakh from him and not returning it. The two had been married for a couple of months before the incident.

On November 10, 2016, a lower court awarded the death sentence to Gaikwad, while his mother and two brothers were convicted for dowry harassment. They were sentenced to one month of rigorous imprisonment. While commuting the death sentence, the division bench comprising Justice S S Shinde and Justice K K Sonawne ruled that Gaikwad had pre-planned the murder and struck with extreme brutality. The circumstances on record show the murder was diabolical, cold-blooded and cruel, they said. They also said the accused had no regard for human life, or feelings of humanity or compassion for the woman. It further added that there were a few mitigating circumstances in favour of Gaikwad. Their neighbour, a witness during his cross-examination, had said the relationship between Gaikwad and Pranita was cordial. 

Another crucial witness, Pranitha’s father, had said that she wanted to stay with Gaikwad. The division bench, citing parameters applied by the Supreme Court and also the absence of criminal antecedents/past criminal record of the accused and the age of the accused, set aside the capital punishment. Lawyer Joydeep Chatterji, representing the four accused in the case, said, “The allegations about cruelty against the accused were too vague and generalized.” The lawyer also said that the judges gave the benefit of doubt to the other three accused in the case as it was on record that none of them were residing with the couple on the day of the incident. They were residing at Rahuri. The lawyer also said police failed to probe the elements of the suspected suicide note.

Source: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/aurangabad/hc-commutes-capital-punishment-to-life/articleshowprint/57832658.cms (Accessed 23 December 2018)

Prez commutes death sentence of four Bihar massacre convicts (Bihar)

Updated: Jan 22, 2017 16:03 IST

HT Correspondent and PTI 

New Delhi/Patna

The Bara massacre near Gaya, in which 34 upper caste men were killed on February 13, 1992, highlighted the deep rooted caste bias in the state.

In a rare gesture, President Pranab Mukherjee has set aside Union home ministry’s recommendation and commuted the death sentence of four persons convicted of killing of 34 upper caste people at Bihar’s Bara village, near Gaya, in 1992. The President gave a new lease of life on the New Year day to Krishna Mochi, Nanhe Lal Mochi, Bir Kuer Paswan and Dharmendra Singh alias Dharu Singh, by commuting their death sentence to life imprisonment.

The four were awarded death sentence on April 8, 2001 by a sessions court at Gaya in connection with the Bara massacre. On April 15, 2002, the Supreme Court confirmed their death sentence in a majority judgment of 2:1, with justice MB Shah dissenting against such an award. Members of erstwhile Maoist Communist Centre had allegedly killed 34 Bhumihars (a landed upper caste) at Bara village on February 13, 1992. The Union home ministry, based on the recommendations of the Bihar government, had recommended on August 8, 2016 that the mercy petition of all the four be rejected.

Pranab Mukherjee

However, the President took into consideration various facts relating to the case, including the delay in handing over the mercy petitions of the four accused by the state government and the observations made by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). The NHRC, in its order last year, had said after an “analysis of the facts and materials placed before the Commission, it emerges that the four convicts in question had submitted their mercy petitions prior to July 7,2004.” “This is clear from the admission of the inspector general (prisons and correctional services), government of Bihar that the mercy petitions of the four convicts were forwarded to the secretariat of Hon’ble President of India through the home department, government of Bihar vide letter dated July 7, 2004.”

However, the mercy petitions neither reached the home ministry, nor the President’s secretariat. It was only after the intervention of the NHRC that these were processed after 12 years.

Source: https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/prez-commutes-death-sentence-of-four-bihar-massacre-convicts/story-ZVSvwtwXpbmNAayBRDwLZJ.html (Accessed 23 December 2018)

Death sentence of ‘Ripper’ Jayanandan commuted to life term (Kerala)

By PTI |Kochi |Published: December 19, 2016 8:50:44 pm 

The court gave its verdict considering Jayanandan's appeal against the sessions court awarding him death sentence for murdering a housewife at Puthenvelikkara in 2006.

The Kerala High Court on Monday commuted the death sentence of ‘Ripper’ Jayanandan, accused in several cases of murder and robbery, to life imprisonment in one of the murder cases against him. A division bench headed by Justice K T Sankaran said the accused should undergo rigorous imprisonment till the end of his life.

K P "Ripper" Jayanandan 

The court gave its verdict considering Jayanandan’s appeal against the sessions court awarding him death sentence for murdering a housewife at Puthenvelikkara in 2006. Earlier, in a double murder case also the death sentence was commuted by the high court. In its judgement, the high court said the case will not fall within the category of rarest of the rare case. However, the bench following the judgement in Swamy Shraddananda case of the apex court, said that the accused should remain in jail till the end of his life without parole or remission.

Source: https://indianexpress.com/article/india/death-sentence-of-ripper-jayanandan-commuted-to-life-term-4435827/ (Accessed 22 December 2018)

Jabalpur rape case: SC commutes death penalty of convict (Madhya Pradesh)

By ANI |New Delhi |Published: September 16, 2016 7:47:36 pm 

The apex court said the case does not fall in the rarest of rare category and clarified that the convict will not be released before 25 years behind bars. The Supreme Court on Friday commuted the death penalty of a convict in a rape and murder case of a seven-year-old girl that took place in 2011 in Jabalpur district of Madhya Pradesh. The apex court said the case does not fall in the rarest of rare category and clarified that the convict will not be released before 25 years behind bars.

Earlier in February 2013, a local court in Jabalpur awarded death sentence to the accused. Terming the case as ‘rarest of rare’, Additional District Judge Chandresh Khare awarded capital punishment to Pancham Lodhi on the basis of evidence submitted by prosecution. As per the prosecution, Pancham Lodhi of Sunachar village in Jabalpur district lured the minor girl to his house and raped her on May 12, 2011. When the girl raised an alarm, he strangulated her and later dumped her body on a loft inside his house. A case under Sections 302 (murder), 363 (kidnapping), 366, 376 (rape) and 201 of the IPC was registered against him and submitted for trial after the probe. The death sentence was upheld by the Madhya Pradesh High Court.

Source: https://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/jabalpur-rape-case-sc-commutes-death-penalty-of-convict-3034714/ (Accessed 20 December 2018) 

Soumya rape case: SC drops murder charge, sets aside death sentence (Kerala)

By Express Web Desk |New Delhi |Published: September 15, 2016 11:54:01 am 

In January 2014, the Kerala High Court upheld the death sentence granted to Govindachamy by a Thrissur Fast-track court. The Supreme Court on Thursday set aside the death sentence given to Govindachamy, a convict in the murder of Soumya, a 23-year-old woman, who was brutally assaulted and pushed off the train. The apex court, however, has held him guilty of rape. Govindachamy’s death sentence has been reduce to a life-term.

Govindachamy

In January 2014, the Kerala High Court upheld the death sentence granted to him by a Thrissur Fast-track court. On February, 1, 2011, Soumya, an employee of a shopping mall in Kochi, was travelling home in an almost empty woman’s coach of a passenger train. Govindachamy molested her and later pushed her out of a train, and also jumped off. Govindachamy then walked towards her and raped her. Soumya was from Ernakulam to Shornur. Soumya succumbed to injuries on February 6 at a government hospital.

Soumya

 

Source: https://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/soumya-rape-case-sc-drops-murder-charge-sets-aside-death-sentence/ (Accessed 20 December 2018)

Delhi: HC Commutes Death Sentence of Serial Killer, Awards Life Term

27 JANUARY 2016 Last Updated at 4:52 PM SOCIETY

The Delhi High Court today commuted to life capital punishment awarded to serial killer Chandrakant Jha in two identical cases of murder and upheld imprisonment of life till death awarded to him in a third similar case by a trial court here. A bench of justices Sanjiv Khanna and R K Gauba upheld Jha's conviction in all the three cases but modified the death sentence awarded to him in two of the cases to life imprisonment till death. "We uphold the conviction in all the three cases. He is sentenced to life term without remission for rest of his life," the bench said.

While commuting death to life term in two cases, the court said, "there was no eye witnesses" to these incidents. In one of the three cases of murder, the trial court on February 4, 2013 had awarded life term till death to Jha for decapitating his victim and dumping the body near the Tihar Jail daring the police to nab him. Jha, a native of Madhepura in Bihar, was sentenced to life term till death in a case relating to killing of one Dilip, whose headless body was dumped near Tihar Jail in 2007.

Chandrakant Jha

On February 5, 2013, Jha was sentenced to death in the second case of identical crime by the same trial court, saying his offence fell under the "rarest of rare case" as the brutality committed by him showed he "cannot be reformed". The court awarded death sentence to Jha for taking away the life of 19-year-old Upender and dumping his headless body also near Tihar jail in 2007.

On February 6, 2013, Jha was awarded death penalty in yet another crime of beheading and chopping the body parts of a victim by the trial court which said he committed the murder in an "extremely brutal, diabolical and revolting manner". In this case, Jha had murdered one Anil Mandal in 2006 and dumped his body outside the jail after chopping off the head and limbs. Jha was arrested by the Delhi Police in May 25, 2007 in Mianwali Nagar here. He was earlier arrested in 1998 in a murder case but was acquitted for want of evidence. In December 2007, a Delhi court had acquitted him in a case after the police failed to file charge sheet against him in another murder case. After committing the murders, Jha had even dared the police by writing several letters to them to nab him, saying he would send similar "gifts" after every 15 days.

Source: https://www.outlookindia.com/newswire/story/delhi-hc-commutes-death-sentence-of-serial-killer-awards-life-term/928301 (Accessed 19 December 2018)

Delhi High Court awards life term to servant, commutes death penalty in double murder case

Sep 28, 2015, 19:25 PM IST

New Delhi: Negating a local court ruling, the High Court on Friday commuted death penalty and awarded life term to a domestic help for murdering an elderly woman and her 12-year-old grandson here in 2007. In 2010, holding that the offence of Mithilesh Kumar Singh fell in the category of "rarest of rare" case, a Delhi Court had awarded death sentence to the accused.

The court had on July 1, 2010 convicted him for the offences of murder, attempt to murder, robbery and for destroying evidence under the IPC. Singh, a resident of Samastipur in Bihar, had killed Karamveer (12) and his maternal grandmother Surjit Kaur, 60, in their house at Vasant Kunj in south Delhi on March 2, 2007. The convict, who was working as a domestic help, sedated their pet dog and killed them before decamping with valuables, and cash.

Mithilesh Kumar 

He was apprehended with the help of Mehar Legha, 15, sister of the deceased boy. The girl, who was also attacked by the domestic help, had raised an alarm which led to the accused being apprehended. The girl was later honoured with the national bravery award in 2008. Besides Mehar, her mother Manjit Legha, a teacher of Delhi Public School, Noida, and her husband, a retired army officer, had also testified in the case. 

Source: http://zeenews.india.com/news/delhi/delhi-double-murder-case-high-court-awards-life-term-to-servant-commutes-death-penalty_1803457.html (Accessed on 19 December 2018)

After 22 rejections, President commutes death sentence of Assam man who killed four

TNN | Mar 28, 2015, 06.38AM IST NEW DELHI: The death sentence of a murder convict from Assam has been commuted to life imprisonment by President Pranab Mukherjee. This is one of the rare cases where Mukherjee has commuted the death sentence after becoming President in 2012. The relief to the condemned prisoner came after the President rejected mercy petitions of 22 death row convicts at a stretch. The President commuted the death sentence of Man Bahadur Dewan, alias Tote Dewan, from Assam's Dibrugarh district, to life imprisonment, sources said. 

Dewan was sentenced to death for killing his wife Gauri and two minor sons, Rajib and Kajib, in September 2002. He had also killed one of his neighbours, Bidhimaya, and surrendered before the police after the multiple murders. The death sentence of 1993 blast convict Yakub Menon, whose mercy petition was rejected by the President, has been stayed by the Supreme Court. Nithari serial rape and murder convict Surender Koli's mercy petition, too, was rejected by Mukherjee. In Dewan's case, Mukherjee is believed to have relied upon the opinion of the home ministry which had advised him to take a lenient view of the case. The ministry is learnt to have advised Mukherjee that Dewan was from a poor background and murdered his wife, sons and a neighbour due to abject poverty and unemployment.

Source: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/After-22-rejections-President-commutes-death-sentence-of-Assam-man-who-killed-four/articleshow/46722185.cms [last accessed 09 April 2015]

Calcutta HC commutes death sentence of child killer

TNN | Apr 3, 2015, 04.49AM IST

KOLKATA: Calcutta high court on Tuesday spared the life of a man sentenced to death for raping and murdering his 13-year-old stepson in September 2007. Sanjay Haldar alias Batul was on death row but will now spend 25 years in jail. He was the ninth prisoner awaiting execution in the state according to a January 2015 headcount. The trial court had sentenced him to death because it felt Sanjay would be a threat to society if allowed to walk free, but a high court division bench thought differently.

The case dates back to September 27, 2007, when a woman, Mamata Haldar, walked into East Jadavpur police station to file a complaint about her missing son. She said that the 13-year-old boy was last seen with her second husband, Sanjay, and that he always hated the child. She said Sanjay regularly abused him sexually and threatened to kill him. The child's body was found dumped in Dhapa and an autopsy confirmed that he had been raped and strangled to death. The prosecution fielded 14 witnesses, one of whom had seen Sanjay and the child just before the murder at Dhapa. The witness picked out Sanjay from a line-up and a trial court sentenced Sanjay to death, noting that it was a heinous crime. "The victim was helpless. The accused, his stepfather, was in a dominating position and had carnal intercourse with him for several days in a very cold and pre-planned way, concealed evidence and brutally strangled him.

The conduct of the accused proves that he is a man who cannot be rectified or reformed. His free movement in society will be dangerous. If this kind of crime is treated leniently, wrong signals will go out to society," the order read. A high court bench of Justice Ashim Kumar Roy and Justice Ishan Chandra Das agreed that the crime was "undoubtedly grave, serious and heinous". "He had a dirty and perverted mind and no control over his carnal desire. The victim was a helpless boy. Not only did he have carnal intercourse with the boy regularly but murdered him and destroyed evidence.

Nevertheless, it cannot be held that he is such a dangerous person that to spare his life would endanger the community," the bench said, adding that seen in the light of the principle laid down by Supreme Court, Sanjay should be jailed for 25 years rather than executed. SC guidelines on imposing death penalty 1) The court must consider every relevant circumstance relating to the crime and the criminal 2) If the court finds that the offence is of an exceptionally depraved and heinous character and constitutes a danger to society, it may impose the death sentence 3) The court should consider the probability of the accused repeating the crime and the likelihood of him/her being reformed and rehabilitated

Source: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/kolkata/Calcutta-HC-commutes-death-sentence-of-child-killer/articleshow/46790749.cms [last accessed 09 April 2015]

Supreme Court commutes man's sentence from death to life imprisonment

Saturday, 20 December 2014 - 7:30am IST | Place: New Delhi | Agency: dna

Prabhati Nayak Mishra

Holding the Central government responsible for causing "in-ordinate delay" for nearly four years in deciding the mercy plea of a death row convict, who had killed his master, a serving Indian Forest Service officer, and four other family members including three children in June 2003, the Supreme Court has commuted his sentence to life imprisonment.

The court has not only dealt with the delay in execution of death sentence but also the issue that he was kept in solitary confinement from the same day the apex court had dismissed his appeal against the capital punishment. A three-judge bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra has taken into consideration not the verdict wherein the death sentence stands imposed, but the subsequent circumstances.

The death sentence awarded to Ajay Kumar Pal by the trial court on April 9, 2007 attained finality when the Supreme Court confirmed the capital punishment on March 16, 2010. He preferred mercy petition on April 10, 2010 which came within a month of the decision of this Court and he was informed in January 2014 about the rejection of his mercy plea by the President in November 2013. "Though no time limit can be fixed within which the mercy petition ought to be disposed of, in our considered view the period of 3 years and 10 months to deal with such plea in the present case comes within the expression inordinate delay." The delay is not to the account of the petitioner....but is certainly to the account of the functionaries and authorities concerned," the bench also comprising justices Rohington Nariman and UU Lalit said on Pal's plea to commute his sentence.

"The petitioner (Pal) has all the while been in solitary confinement i.e. since the day he was awarded death sentence. In the light of the enunciation of law by this Court, the petitioner could never have been"segregated"till his mercy petition was disposed of...," the bench said while terming "this is complete transgression of the right under Article 21 (right to life) of the Constitution causing incalculable harm to the petitioner."

Pal was working as a domestic help for 10 years at the house of a serving Indian Forest Officer Dhirendra Kumar in Gandhi Vihar area Ranchi. In June 2, 2003 Pal had killed Kumar and four others and later set the house on fire. Next day morning, the neighbours found him hiding in the well after committing the crime.

Source: http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-supreme-court-commutes-man-s-sentence-from-death-to-life-imprisonment-2045482 [last accessed 06.02.2015]

Honour killing: HC commutes to life death sentence of three

Press Trust of India | New Delhi April 17, 2014 Last Updated at 19:16 IST

The Delhi High Court today commuted to life term the death sentence awarded to three members of a family for the honour killing of a teen couple in 2010, saying there is a possibility of their reformation. A special bench of justices S Muralidhar and Mukta Gupta acquitted two others - the girl's mother and aunt - who also had been awarded capital punishment by the trial court, saying they were only "spectators" to the crime and did not share the common intention to murder the couple.

 "The court is of the opinion that ends of justice would be met if convicted appellants Om Prakash and Suraj are awarded the sentence of imprisonment for life which will not be less than 20 years actual. Since, appellant Sanjeev is a young man who was not married, the court considers it fit to sentence him to imprisonment of life subject to remissions.... "Appellants Maya (mother) and Khushboo (aunt) are acquitted of the offences with which they were charged," the bench said.

It said, "The two ladies could be at best be said to be spectators to what was being done by the three men in the house. "No doubt, as a mother and aunt there was an omission on their part to have not saved at least Asha, their daughter. However, the said omission does not qualify the test that they shared the common intention with the three men to commit the murder....," the high court said. Defence lawyer Sumeet Verma had argued that in the absence of an overt act being attributed to Khushboo and Maya, they cannot be convicted for offence of murder on the ground that they shared a common intention to commit the crime.

The court reduced to life term the death sentence awarded to the girl's father, uncle and cousin brother - Suraj, Om Prakash and Sanjeev respectively - saying there is no material placed on record by the State to show they cannot be reformed or are a menace to the society. "Although there are aggravating circumstances, there is no material placed on record by the State to show that the appellants Om Prakash, Suraj and Sanjeev are persons who cannot be reformed or are a menace to the society.... "Thus, this court is of the considered opinion that the penalty of death cannot be awarded to convicted appellants," the bench said.

Source: http://indianexpress.com/article/cities/delhi/hc-commutes-death-penalty-to-life-in-honour-killing-case/ [accessed 24 April 2014]

Wife's murder: High Court commutes death penalty to life term

By Express News Service - KOCHI

24th July 2013 12:56 PM

The High Court on Tuesday set aside the death penalty awarded to Saji alias Unni of Perumbavoor, for the murder of his wife in 2010, and commuted it to life imprisonment. A division bench comprising Justice S Siri Jagan and Justice K Ramakrishnan passed an order while quashing the order of Ernakulam District and Sessions Court. The Bench awarded life term and imposed a fine of Rs 1 lakh on the accused. The prosecution case was that  the petitioner had also attempted to murder his mother-in-law. The court held that “life imprisonment is a rule and death penalty is an exception”.
It also said that murder was a grave offence. But, merely because it was committed, death penalty cannot be awarded. The case will not come under the rarest of the rare category so capital punishment is not needed, said the Bench. The court directed that Rs 20,000 from the fine amount should be given to the mother of the victim and Rs 80,000 to the child.

Source : http://newindianexpress.com/cities/kochi/Wifes-murder-High-Court-commutes-death-penalty-to-life-term/2013/07/24/article1699038.ece