Holding

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction and death sentence, holding that the circumstantial evidence formed a complete chain proving guilt and the case qualifies as "rarest of rare" warranting the death penalty, with no mitigating effect from alleged mental impairment or the appellant's youth.

Summary

Ram Deo Chauhan (alias Raj Nath Chauhan) was convicted of the pre‑planned, cold‑blooded murder of four members of a family, including a two‑year‑old child and two women, and of causing injuries to two other persons. The trial and high courts relied on a chain of circumstantial evidence and a confessional statement to uphold the conviction and impose the death penalty under IPC Section 302. The appellant challenged the conviction on the ground that there was no direct evidence and that he might have been mentally impaired at the time of the offences. The Supreme Court examined the medical board report and found no evidence of any mental abnormality or deprivation of senses, rejecting the claim of mitigation. It also held that under Article 136 the appellate court does not normally reopen findings of fact, and the circumstances of the case fell within the "rarest of rare" category justifying death. The Court further ruled that the appellant's youth was not a sufficient mitigating factor to offset the extreme cruelty of the murders. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed and the death sentence affirmed.

Issues considered

The adequacy of circumstantial evidence to sustain a conviction for murder
Whether the appellant was mentally impaired or deprived of his senses at the time of the offences
Whether the death penalty is warranted under the "rarest of rare" doctrine
Whether the appellate court may reopen findings of fact under Article 136 of the Constitution
The relevance of the appellant's youth as a mitigating factor

Legislation cited

Constitution of Indias. Article 136
Indian Penal Code, 1860s. 302, s. 323, s. 325, s. 326

Subjects

murdercircumstantial evidencedeath penaltyrarest of raremental fitnessappeal under Article 136juvenile offenderIPC Section 302convictionsentencing

Judgment

A RAM DEO CHAUHAN ALIAS RAJ NATH CHAUHAN
v.
STATE OF ASSAM
b
JULY 31, 2000

B [K.T. THOMAS AND R.P. SETHI, JJ.]

Indian Penal Code 1860 : Section 302.

Murder-Circumstantial evidence-Conviction based on-Imposition of
death penalty-Legality of
c
Death Penalty-Accused-Quadruple murder offour members of a fam-
ily including a child and two women-Murders committed after previous plan-
ning and in the most brutal manner-Medical evidence indicating that accused
was not deprived ofhis senses at the time ofcommission of offence-Confession
D of accused duly proved-Sentence of death imposed by Trial Court and af-
firmed by High Court-Appeal before Supreme Court-Held the case of the
accused falls under rarest of the rare category-Hence infliction of death
penalty was called for-Award of lesser sentence only on the ground of the
appellant being a youth at the time of occurrence not a mitigating circum-
stance.
E
Constitution of India, 1950 : Article 136.

Appeal-Concurrent findings of facts by courts below-Power of Su-
preme Court to interfere with.

F The appellant was convicted under Sections 302, 323, 325 and 326 of
the Indian Penal Code, 1860. He committed murder of four persons of a
family and caused injuries to the mother of deceased No. 1 and to the
neighbourer of the deceased. The prosecution case, based on circumstan- '
tial evidence, was that the appellant committed a pre-planned, cold blooded
brutal murder of four members of a family - including a child aged 2-1/2
G
years and two women - when they were sleeping. Trial Court convicted
him of the offences charged and awarded him death sentence. High Court
affirmed the conviction of the accused. It found that the accused
committed heinous, dastardly, gruesome and cruel crime after pre-medita-
tion. Accordingly, it confirmed the death sentence awarded by the Trial
H Court. Both the courts below concurrently found that the incriminating
28
R.D. CHAUHAN ALIAS R.N. CHAUHAN v. STATE 29
circumstances in the case were such which lead only to the hypothesis of A
the guilt and reasonably exclude every possibility of innocence of the
appellant. A confessional statement made by the accused was also duly
proved.

In appeal to this Court it was contended on behalf of the appellant
that as there was no direct evidence available in the case it would not be B
safe to convict and sentence him for the offence of murder. It was also
suggested that the accused might have been deprived of his senses at the
time of commission of the crime. Pursuant to the directions of this court
the accused was examined by a Medical Board. From the report it was
clear that his cognitive faculties were within normal limit and there was no C
evidence to suggest abnormalities in his mental faculties.

Dismissing the appeal, the Court

HELD : 1. The conviction of the appellant as recorded by the Trial

- Court and confirmed_by the High Court is upheld. It is generally believed
and accepted that the witnesses may lie but the circumstances cannot. It
has rightly been found that the circumstances proved against the appellant
form themselves into a complete chain unerringly pointing to his guilt.
D

[31-D; 32-H; 33B]

2. There is no good ground to deviate from the general practice that E
in an appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution of India normally the
concurrent findings of fact relating to appreciation of evidence would not
be re-opened. In this case no circumstance has been referred to requiring
re-appreciation of evidence. [33-A; B]

Malempati Pattabhi Narendra v. Ghattamanent Maruthi Prasad and F

- Anr., [2000] 5 SCC 226, referred to.

3. On the basis of the medical report, it cannot be said that the
appellant was, in any way, deprived of his senses even temporarily at the
time of commission of offence. It appears from his confessional statement,
which has been duly proved, that he had prepared himself for committing G
this ghastly crime of murdering four innocent persons. There is no doubt
that the murders have been committed by the appellant after previous
planning which involved extreme brutality. [36-D]

4. It is true that in a civilised society a tooth for tooth, and a nail for
nail or death for death is not the rule but it is equally true that when a man H
30 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2000] SUPP. 2 S.C.R.
A becomes a beast and menace to the society, he can be deprived of his life
according to the procedure established by law, as Constitution itself has
recognised the death sentence as a permissible punishment for which suffi-
cient constitutional provision for an appeal, reprieve and/the like have
been provided under the law. It is true that life sentence is the rule and
death sentence is an exception. The present case is an exceptional case
B
which warrants the awarding of maximum penalty under the law to the
accused-appellant. The crime committed by him is not only shocking but it
has also jeopardised the society. The awarding of lesser sentence only on
the ground of the appellant being a youth at the time of occurrence cannot
be considered as a mitigating circumstances in view of the finding that the
c murders committed by him were most cruel, heinous and dastardly. There
is no doubt that the present case is the rarest of the rare requiring the
maximum penalty, imposable under law. [38-D-G]

Balwant Singh v. State of Punjab, [1976] l SCC 425; Ba.chan Singh v.
State of Punjab, [1980] 2 SCC 684 and Magahar Singh v. Sta,te of Punjab,
D
[1975] 4 sec 234, referred to.

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal AppeafNo. 4 of
2000.

From the Judgment and Order dated 1.2.99 of the Assam High Court in
E Crl.A. No. 109/98 in Crl.D.R. No. l of 1998.

Balraj Dewan (A.C.) for the Appellants.

Subhajyoti Borth.akar, Ms. Sushma Sharma and Sunil Jain for Mis. Jain
Hansaria & Co. for the Respondent.
F
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

SETHI, J. The appellant was charged under Sections 302 and 326 IPC
for having caused the death of four persons of a family, namely, Mr. Babani
Charan Das, Assistant Engineer, PWD, Morigaon Division, aged 37 years, his ......,
G wife Smt. Minati Das, aged about 30 years, their daughter aged 2-l/2 years and
Ms. Smriti Rekha Das, sister of Babani Charan Das aged about 22 years. He
was also charged to have caused injuries with the sharp edged weapon to Smt.
Jayanti Das, the mother of the deceased No. I and Shri Rajen Hazarika,
neighbourer of the deceased. On proof of charges, the Trial Court convicted
H the appellant of the offences punishable under Sections 302, 326, 325 and 323
R.D. CHAUHAN ALIAS R.N. CHAUHAN v. STATE [SETHI, J.] 31
IPC. As he was sentenced to death under Section 302 IPC, the Trial Court did A
not feel the necessity of awarding separate punishments for offences under
Sections 326, 325 and 323 IPC. The Trial Court submitted the entire proceed-
ings to the High Court for confirmation of the sentence. The appellant also filed
an appeal against the order of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial
Court. Both the Criminal Death Reference No.I of 1998 and Criminal Appeal
B
No.109 of 1998 were disposed of by the judgment impugned in this appeal by
confirming the conviction and sentence awarded by the Trial Court. Not sat-
isfied with the impugned judgment, the appellant has preferred the present
appeal in this Court.

We have heard the learned amicus curaie appearing for the appellant and C
the learned counsel for the respondent. We have also perused the record and
minutely examined the evidence led in the case. The report recording mental
state examination of the appellant has also been examined by us.

Learned amicus curaie has submitted that as there was no direct evidence
D
available in the case it would not be safe to convict and sentence the appellant
for the offence of murder as has been done by the courts below. We are not
satisfied with this submission. It is generally believed and accepted that the
witnesses may lie but the circumstances cannot. The Trial Court has enumer-
ated the circumstances appearing against the accused as under:
E
"(1) On the fateful day, inmates of the house present were Bhabani
Charan Das, his wife Minati Das, his only daughter Darathi Das
and his sister Smriti Rekha Das and the accused Ramdeo Chauhan
alias Rajnath Chauhan. Another inmate of the house, mother of
Bhabani Charan Das was absent on that day.
F
,' (2) All the four members of the ill-fated family were found dead and
their dead bodies were lying in three different rooms in pool of
blood and all the doors and windows of the house were closed
and the front door was under lock to give an impression that
inmates of the house had gone somewhere. G

(3) At that time, only alive person present in the house was the
accused and no prudent person would believe that he had no
knowledge that all the inmates of the house were lying dead
inside the rooms.
H
32 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2000) SUPP. 2 S.C.R.
A (4) Intentionally he gave false information to PWS that all four
inmates of the house were sleeping in their rooms.
...
(5) When PWS entered into the room and shouted seeing the ugly
scene, she was attacked by the accused Ramdeo Chauhan alias
Rajnath Chauhan.
B
(6) Perhaps, if the handle of the spade would not have been broken
during tussle there was every possibility of killing PWS by the
accused with the spade.

(7) He also attacked Rajen Hazarika (PWI) when he went to save
c the old lady from his (accused) attack.

(8) Conduct of the accused in attacking and assaulting PWS and
PWl is another action indicating his involvement in the ghastly
crime.

D (9) The accused also led the police to recover the spade used in
commission of the crime which was used in commission of the
crime which was seized and exhibited in the court.

(10) Lastly, he confessed his guilt."

The Trial Court has rightly concluded that the prosecution had fully
E established the existence of aforesaid circumstances and the circumstances
narrated created such a chain complete in itself which lead to the only conclu-
sion that the accused had committed the crime for which he was charged. The
High Court also after examining the statement of the witnesses, the recovery
memos and the confessional statement of the accused came to the conclusion:
F "The entire evidence brought on the record of the case, in our consid-
ered view, creates a chain of circumstances with no missing link which
points to the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Minor
contradictions and inconsistencies here and there in the peculiar facts

G
and circumstances of the present case do not create any doubt about
the prosecution case."
..
Both the courts below have concurrently concluded that the incriminating
circumstances in the case are such which lead only to the hypothesis of the guilt
and reasonably exclude every possibility of innocence of the appellant. It has
also rightly been found that the circumstances proved against the appellant
H form themselves into a complete chain unerringly pointing to his guilt.
R.D. CHAUHAN ALIAS R.N. CHAUHAN v. STATE [SETHI, J.] 33
This Court has in Malempati Pattabhi Narendra v. Ghattamaneni Maruthi A

-- Prasad & Anr., (2000] 5 SCC 226 has ruled that in an appeal under Article
136 of the Constitution of India normally the concurrent findings of fact
relating to appreciation of evidence would not be re-opened. In the present
case we do not feel and find any good ground to deviate from the general
practice. No circumstance has been .referred to requiring re-appreciation of
B
evidence. We have thus no hesitation in upholding the conviction of the
appellant as recorded by the Trial Court and confirmed by the High Court.

Regarding Sentence

During the pendency of the appeal it was suggested that the appellant
might have been deprived of hi.s senses at the time of occurrence or caused c
the deaths on account of sudden provocation. As the accused had been
convicted and sentenced to death we thought that in the interests of justice
we should have a report from the competent expert of mental illness. Con-
sequently the arrangements were made to keep the appellant under observa-
tion in the mental hospital at Tejpur, Assam. The members of the family of D
the appellant were also directed to be contacted for ascertaining his anteced-
ents. The experts of the mental hospital at Tejpur were directed to prepare a
report regarding all aspects relating to cognitive faculties (present and past)
to the extent ascertainable by them within a period of one month from the
date of our order passed on 29.3.2000.
E
In obedience to our directions the appellant was admitted for observa-
tion in the hospital and was kept under observation with effect from 10.4.2000
to 20.4.2000. During the aforesaid period his ward behaviour, socialisation,
personal hygiene, food intake and sleep patterns were periodically observed.
His mental state was also periodically examined by psychiatrists independ-
F
ently. He was examined by a Medical Board headed by Dr. J.c.'sarmah, SDM
& HC as Chairman, the other members of the Board being Dr. K. Pathak,
Asstt.Professor, Psychiatry and Dr. B.S Neog, M&HO-I, Psychiatry. To gather
antecedents, history of the appellant and his family, his father was interviewed
by the Medical Board on 12.4.2000. The appellant was also permitted to meet
his father in order to watch his emotional reaction during the interaction. The G
Board has reported:

"Development history:

As mother did not come, detail history regarding birth is not
· available. So far father can remember it was uneventful normal H
34 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2000] SUPP. 2 S.C.R.
A delivery. His mile-stone development was normal. There is no history
of neurotic traits in ihe childhood. He was quarrelsome and irritable
since childhood. From 10 years of age he became increasingly quar-
relsome and started quarreling with neighbours and friends very
frequently for trivial reasons. But he was not involved in physical
fighting or any other activities like stealing, gambling etc. His per-
B
formance in the school was average. No abnormality was observed
in his behaviour during childhood.

When he was 14 years old, that is about 7-8 years back, one day
·he ran away from home and remained untraced. The father tried to find
c him out and searched everywhere possible. But there was no message
from him. Then after 6 months Rajnath Chauhan (Ramdeo) was brought
to his home by the police. Father says that then only they came to
know that Rajnath (Ramdeo) was involved in murder case. Rajnath
admitted before parents about committing the murder, but did not
disclose anything in detail, according to father.
D
Father says that before leaving home there was no abnormality
observed in Rajnath's behaviour except irritability. Ramdeo was on
parole for about 8 months. During this period he was at home and then
also no abnormality was notiCed in his behaviour. He was helping in
E house-hold chores and sleep was normal.

History of physical illness:

There is no history of any major physical illness in the past. There
is no history of epilepsy or head injury. At present on physical exami-
F nation his physical parameters are normal.

Family history:

There is no history of mental illness in both paternal and maternal
side.
G
Observation during hospital stay:

In the initial period of his stay in the hospital he was tense, anxious
and was uncooperative. He was not talking properly and replied
in monosyllabic terms on repeated persuation. From second day on-
H wards he started cooperating. Throughout the period of his stay no
R.D. CHAUHAN ALIAS R.N. CHAUHAN v. STATE [SETHI, J.] 35
abnormality is observed in his behaviour and emotion. Gradually he A
started socialising with hospital staff though it is not spontaneous. His
sleep pattern is normal. He maintained personal hygiene. Food intake
is normal. He shows the tendency of dramatization at times.

Mental State Examination:
B
Appearance and general behaviour - Ramdeo Chauhan sits com-
fortably throughout the interview sessions. He is dressed properly. He
maintains eye to eye contact. He is cooperative. Personal hygiene is
maintained.

Speech is slow and hesitant initially. Later on normal flow and
c
rate is observed. Speech is relevant and coherent. No abnormality of
speech patterns are observed.

Mood and affect are euthnic, submissive in nature and congruity
is rresent. D

No abnormality in the thought process is observed.

There is no perceptual disorder.

Higher function - consciousness is clear. E

Attention can be drawn and it is sustained.

Memory - immediate, recent and remote memory are intact.

Orientation - In relation to time place and person are intact. F

Social and personal judgment - intact, when asked his reaction to three
different situations he gave rational answers.

> Similarity test- He could tell the similarities between different pairs of
items. G

Proverb test: He says that he does not know any proverb - which is
normal considering his socio-economic background and prolonged
confinement.
H
36 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2000] SUPP. 2 S.C.R.
A

-
Intelligence- Average.

Insight is intact: He knows the reason why he is in jail and now prays
for his release.

Hence, from observation of behaviour and mental state exami-
B nations at present his cognitive faculties are found within normal
limit. From the available informations gathered about his past, there
is no evidence to suggest abnormalities in mental faculties also in the
past."

It may also be pointed out that when during the trial the appellant was
C examined for determination of his age, a team of doctors headed by
Dr. Bhushan Candra Roy had found that "the individual was mentally sound
on the date of examination. Intelligence and memory were average on the date
of examination''. In view of what has been noticed hereinabove, it cannot be
said that the appellant was, in any way, deprived of his senses even tempo-
rarily at the time of commission of offence. It appears from his confessional
D
statement, which has been duly proved, that he had prepared himself for
committing this ghastly crime of murdering four innocent persons. There is
no doubt in our mind that the murders have been committed by the appellant
after previous planning which involved extreme brutality.

E This Court in §alwant Singh V. State of Punjab, [1976] 1 sec 425, has
ruled that only for special reasons which are required to be stated, the death
sentence can be passed. It is not possible to catalogue the special reasons
justifying the passing of the death sentence which are required to be deter-
mined under the facts and circumstances of each case. In Bachan Singh v.
State of Punjab, [1980] 2 SCC 684, this Court held:
F
" ... for making the choice of punishment or for ascertaining the
existence or absence of "special reasons" in that context, the court
must pay due regard both to the crime and the criminal. What is the
relative weight to be given to the aggravating and mi.ligating factors,
depends on the facts and circumstances of the particulai case. More
G often than not these two aspects are so intertwined that it is difficult
to give a separate \featrnent to each of.them. This is so because 'style
is the man'. In many cases, the extremely cruel or beastly manner of
the commission of murder is itself a demonstrated index of the de-
praved character of the perpetrator. That is why, it is not desirable to
H consider the circumstances of the crime and the circumstances of the
R.D. CHAUHAN ALIAS R.N. CHAUHAN v. STATE [SETHI, J.] 37
criminal in two separate water-tight compartments. In a sense, to kill A
is to be cruel and therefore all murders are cruel. But such cruelty may
vary in its degree of culpability. And it is only when the culpability
assumes the proportion of extreme depravity that "special reasons" can
legitimately be said to exist."

Commission of the crime in a brutal manner or on a helpless child or the B
woman or the like were held to be such circumstances which justify the
imposition of maximum penalty. In Magahar Singh v. State of Punjab, (1975]
4 SCC 234, this Court held that "for pre-planned cold blooded murder death
sentence is proper''.

The Trial Court, after referring to various judgments, concluded:
c
"In the case in our hand, it is apparently a pre-planned, cold-blooded,
brutal quadruple murder. It is relevant that the murder was committed
in the most brutal manner with severe cruelty inflicting number of
injuries on each victim including a female baby hardly of 2-1/2 years D
of age and two helpless women. They were murdered while they were
in deep sleep after lunch keeping the doors and windows of the house
open without suspecting any foul play from any quarter. It is, in my
view, a rarest of the rare cases which is of exceptional nature. Facts and
circumstances of the case justify the extreme penalty provided U/S 302
IPC. The accused seems to be a menace to the society and in my view, E
sentence of life imprisonment would be altogether inadequate, because
the crime is so brutal, diabolical and revolting as to shock the collective
conscience of the community. Extreme penalty, in my view, is neces-
sary in such cases to protect the community and to deter others from
committing such crime." F
The High Court also referred to various judgments of this Court and
found on facts:

"There cannot be any manner of doubt that in the present case murders
have been committed by the accused after pre- meditation with a G
motive to commit a theft. The crime can be described to be heinous,
dastardly, gruesome and cruel. The persons asleep have been killed in
a merciless manner by the accused who has no value for human lives.
The crime committed by the accused falls within the aggravating
circumstances as it has been committed after previous planning involv-
H
38 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2000] SUPP. 2 S.C.R.
A ing extreme cruelty. The murders in the present case involve excep-
tional depravity. In view of all this the question arises whether the
single circumstance of the accused being too young should be good
enough for us to award lighter punishment or not. We have not been
able to lay our hands upon any observations of the Apex Court and
none has been brought to our notice during the course of arguments
B
that even if all the aggravating circumstances are present in a particular
given case, single circumstance of the accused being too young or too
old would outweigh other aggravating circumstances and the court
must on the basis of a single circumstance grant lighter punishment.
Having given our deep and thoughtful consideration and after giving
c due weight to the mitigating as well as aggravating circumstances
which have been referred to above, we are of the view that the accused
in the present case must be given death sentence. The present is one
of the rarest of rare cases in which infliction of extreme penalty is
called for."
D It is true that in a civilised society a tooth for tooth, and a nail for nail
or death for death is not the rule but it is equdlly true that when a man becomes
a beast and menace to the society, he can be deprived of his life according
to the procedure established by law, as Constitution itself has recognised the
death sentence as a permissible punishment for which sufficient Constitutional
E provision for an appeal, reprieve and the like have been provided under the law.
It is true that life sentence is the rule and death sentence is an exception. We
are satisfied that the present case is an exceptional case which warrants the
awarding of maximum penalty under the law to the accused/appellant. The
crime committed by the appellant is not only shocking but it has also jeopard-
ised the society. The awarding of lesser sentence only on the ground of the
F
appellant being a youth at the time of occurrence cannot be considered as a
mitigating circumstance in view of our findings that the murders corrunitted by
him were most cruel, heinous and dastardly. We have no doubt that the present
case is the rarest of the rare requiring the maximum penalty, imposable under
law.
G
There is no merit in this appeal which is dismissed. The conviction and
sentence passed by the Trial Court, as confirmed by the High Court, is upheld.

T.N.A. Appeal dismissed.