Anil @ Anthony Arikswamy Joseph V/s State of Maharashtra

Information Type: Judicial Information
Court: Supreme Court
Date of Judgment(s): 2014-01-20
Case No: 1419-1420
Case Type: Appeal (Criminal)
Judge Name: K.S. Radhakrishnan and Vikramajit Sen
Subject: Criminal Law
Statutes / Acts: Indian Penal Code
Section: Sections 302, 377 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)
Bench Strength: Double Bench
Advocate: P.C. Aggarwala, Revathy Raghavan (P) & Shankar Chillage, Asha Gopalan Nair (D)
State of Appellant(s): Maharashtra
History of Case No: The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Nagpur in Sessions Trial No.167 of 2008
Case Note / Description :

Criminal - Murder - Death sentence - A minor boy aged 10 years was murdered after he was subjected to carnal intercourse and then strangulated to death - Accused was charge-sheeted with offences punishable under Sections 302, 377 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) - High Court had confirmed the death sentence - Appellant, submitted that the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt and all the circumstances put together would lead to only one inference that the accused was not guilty of the offences charged against him - Held, the prosecution succeeded in establishing its case beyond reasonable doubt that the deceased was last seen in the company of the accused and that the findings recorded by the trial Court and affirmed by the High Court call for no interference - In the instant case the crime test and criminal test stood fully satisfied against the accused - Life of a boy, the only son of the mother, was taken away in a gruesome and barbaric manner which pricks not only the judicial conscience but also the conscience of the society - Legislative policy is discernible from Section 235(2) read with Section 354(3) of the Cr.P.C., that when culpability assumes the proportions of depravity, the Court has to give special reasons within the meaning of Section 354(3) for imposition of death sentence - Legislative policy is that when special reasons do exist, as in the instant case, the Court has to discharge its constitutional obligations and honour the legislative policy by awarding appropriate sentence, that is the will of the people - Incarceration of a further period of thirty years, without remission, in addition to the sentence already undergone, would be an adequate punishment in the facts and circumstances of the case, rather than death sentence - It was ordered accordingly

 
 
SignUp For News Letter

Get news and updates from OLIS group, to your email :
Contact Information
Raj Kumar (Ph.D Research Scholar)
Dr. M. Madhusudhan (Supervisor)
DEPARTMENT OF LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SCIENCE
II Floor, Tutorial Building, University of Delhi , Delhi-110 007
Mobile : +91-011-27666656
Email : info@olisindia.in
All Rights Reserved@ University of Delhi, Website Designed and Developed by Raj Kumar(Ph.D Research Scholar)