2012ACR2799, AIR2012SC3422, 2013(2)AJR728, 2012BomCR(Cri)648, 2012CriLJ3909, 2012(3)Crimes137, 2012(4)J.L.J.R.67, 2012(3)JCC2255, JT2012(6)SC437, 2012MLJ(Crl)799, 2012(4)PLJR42, 2012(6)SCALE464, (2012)8SCC43, 2012(3)UC1679

Bombay High Court confirmed order of conviction and enhanced sentence of life imprisonment to death and ordered to be hanged till death - Hence, present Appeal - Held, Apex Court in a recent judgment in Rajesh Kumar v. State through Government of NCT of Delhi held that object of hearing under Section 235(2) of CrPC, being intrinsically and inherently connected with sentencing procedure, provisions of Section 354(3) of CrPC, which called for recording of special reason for awarding death sentence, must be read conjointly - Court held that, such special reasons could only be validly recorded, if an effective opportunity of hearing as contemplated under Section 235(2) of CrPC, was genuinely extended and was allowed to be exercised by accused who stand convicted and was awaiting sentence - High Court had only mechanically recorded what Accused had said and no attempt had been made to elicit any information or particulars from Accused or prosecution which were relevant for awarding a proper sentence - No genuine effort had been made by Court to elicit any information either from accused or prosecution as to whether any circumstance existed which might influence Court to avoid and not to award death sentence - Awarding death sentence was an exception, not rule, and only in rarest of rare cases, Court could award death sentence - State of mind of a person awaiting death sentence and state of mind of a person who had been awarded life sentence might not be same mentally and psychologically - Court had got a duty and obligation to elicit relevant facts, even if accused had kept totally silent in such situations - In instant case, High Court had not addressed the issue in correct perspective bearing in mind those relevant factors, while questioning Accused and, therefore, committed a gross error of procedure in not properly assimilating and understanding purpose and object behind Section 235(2) of CrPC - Matter remitted to High Court to follow Section 235(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure in accordance with principles laid down - Conviction awarded by High Court, however, stand confirmed - Appeal allowed

Indian Penal Code, 1860

Indian Evidence Act, 1872