Gurvail Singh @ Gala & Another V/s State of Punjab

Information Type: Judicial Information
Court: Supreme Court
Date of Judgment(s): 2013-02-07
Case No: 1055 of 2006
Case Type: Appeal (Criminal)
Judge Name: K.S. Radhakrishnan & Dipak Misra
Subject: Criminal Law-Capital Punishment
Statutes / Acts: Indian Penal Code 1860 (IPC), Code of Criminal Procedure 1973
Section: 302/34 IPC
Bench Strength: Double Bench
Advocate: Rishi Malhotra, Tara Chandra Sharma, Uma Datta et. al (P) & Jayant K. Sud, AAG, Punjab, Vishal Dabas, Chirag Khurana and Kuldip Singh
History of Case No: Order dated 22.09.2006 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No. 890-DB of 2005 and M.R. No. 10 of 2005
Equal Citation Details :

2013(3)ACR2996, 2013II AD (S.C.) 369, AIR2013SC1177, 2013(2)ALD(Cri) 255, 2013 (81) ALLCC 359, 2013ALLMR(Cri)1464, 2013(1) CGBCLJ 437, 2013CriLJ1460, 2013(2)JCC1025, JT2013(2)SC436, 2013(1)N.C.C.691, 2013(1)RCR(Criminal)989, 2013(2)SCALE271, (2013)2 SCC713

Case Note / Description :

Partly allowing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. To award death sentence, the aggravating circumstances (crime test) have to be fully satisfied and there should be no mitigating circumstance (criminal test) favouring the accused. Even if both the tests are satisfied as against the accused, even then the Court has to finally apply the Rarest of Rare Cases test which depends on the perception of the society and not `judge-centric', that is whether the society will approve the awarding of death sentence to certain types of crime or not. While applying this test, the Court has to look into variety of factOTHERS like society's abhorrence, extreme indignation and antipathy to certain types of crimes like rape and murder of minor girls, especially intellectually challenged minor girls, minor girls with physical disability, old and infirm women with those disabilities etc. Courts award death sentence, because situation demands, due to constitutional compulsion, reflected by the will of the people, and not Judge centric. [Para 13] 2. In the instant case, the appellants do not deserve death sentence. Some of the mitigating circumstances, as enunciated in *Machhi Singh case, come to the rescue of the appellants. Age definitely is a factor which cannot be ignored, though not determinative factor in all fact situations. The probability that the accused persons could be reformed and rehabilitated is also a factor to be borne in mind. Due to the fact that the appellants are instrumental for the death of four persons and nature of injuries they have inflicted, in front of PW1, whose son, daughter-in-law and two grand children were murdered, the appellants deserve no sympathy. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the present case, imposition of death sentence on the appellants was not warranted but while awarding life imprisonment to the appellants, it is held that they must serve a minimum of thirty years in jail without remission. 

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973                        Indian Pebal Code, 1860

 
 
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)