Holding

The Supreme Court held that the gruesome, pre‑meditated murder of the accused’s wife and four children constitutes a ‘rarest of rare’ case warranting the death penalty, and therefore the High Court’s commutation to life imprisonment was untenable.

Summary

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed against the Allahabad High Court’s reduction of a death sentence to life imprisonment for Alok Verma, who brutally murdered his wife and four children with a knife and axe, aided by a hired accomplice. The trial court had imposed death based on compelling circumstantial evidence and the testimony of a surviving daughter. The High Court commuted the sentence, citing the accused’s financial crisis, unemployment, and alleged doubts about paternity as mitigating factors, and held that the case did not fall within the ‘rarest of rare’ category. The Supreme Court found this reasoning “strange,” emphasizing the extreme brutality and pre‑meditation of the killings, and concluded that the case indeed qualified as ‘rarest of rare’ warranting death. Consequently, the Court issued a notice to the respondent asking why the life sentence should not be enhanced to death, leaving the matter pending.

Issues considered

Whether the High Court erred in commuting the death sentence to life imprisonment in the present case.
Whether the circumstances alleged by the High Court (financial crisis, doubt about paternity) constitute valid mitigation under the ‘rarest of rare’ doctrine.
Whether the nature of the murders justifies the imposition of the death penalty.

Subjects

death penaltyrarest of rare doctrinemurdercircumstantial evidencecommutationlife imprisonmentSupreme Courtnotice

Judgment

[2011) 11 S.C.R. 10b

STATE OF U.P. A
v.
ALOK VERMA
(SLP (Crl.) No. 6718 of 2011)
SEPTEMBER 02, 2011
B
[MARKANDEY KAT JU AND CHANDRAMAULI KR.
PRASAD, JJ.]

Sentence/Sentencing - Death sentence - Accused
committed murder of wife and four children as also caused C
injuries to another daughter with knife and,axe taking help of
a hired person - Conviction by courts below on basis of the
circumstantial evidencf] as also evidence of the surviving
daughter-eye witness to the incident - Death sentence
awarded by the trial court modified to life sentence by High D
Court - On appeal, held: On facts, the said act was a ghastly
and brutal act - It falls in the category of rarest of rare cases
in which death sentence should have been given - Reasoning
of the High Court reducing the award of death sentence to life
sentence is strange - Thus, notice issued to the accused as E
to why the life sentence awarded to him by the High Court
should not be enhanced to death sentence.

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: SLP (Crl.) No.
6718 of 2011.
F
From the Judgment & Order dated 7.8.2009 of the High
Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Captial Jail Appeal No.
6352 of 2008 and Reference No. 8 of 2008.

Pramod Swarup, Pareena Swarup, Pradeep Misra for the G
Petitioner.

The following Order of the Court was delivered

105 H
106 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 11 S.C.R.

A 0 R D E R
Heard Mr. Pramod Swarup, learned senior counsel
appearing for the petitioner-State of U.P.

The allegations against the respondent accused, which
B have been found true by the courts below, are that the
respondent murdered his wife and four children (three sons and
one daughter) and caused injuries to another daughter with knife
and axe taking the help of a hired person. This is because his
wife protested against his indulgence in gambling, taking liquor
C and crimes like. kidnapping. He had earlier to undergo
imprisonment for one year in a case of kidnapping. His wife
tried to persuade him not to commit th~se illegal acts and get
reformed, but instead he would often beat her, and ultimately
he committed these ghastly and brutal crimes of murdering his
D wife and four children, who are aged about 10, 8,.5 and 2 years
respectively. The surviving daughter Priyanka is an eye witness
and that apart there is convincing circumstantial evidence also
on the basis of which the respondent has been convicted by
the courts below.
E
The injuries on the deceased Shikha, wife of the accused-
respondent are as follows :-

1. Multiple incised wounds over face and forehead
size 1 cm x 0.5 cm to 3 cm x 0.5 cm bone deep.
F
2. Incised wound 4 cm x 1 _cm trachea deep on front
of neck below hyoid bone. On dissection the
underlying large vessels, tracheas and nerves were
cut.
G 3. Incised wound 4 cm x 1 cm size muscle deep·on
b~ck of root of neck.

4. Incised wound 4 cm x .5 cm muscle deep on top of
(Rt.) shoulder.
H
STATE OF U.P. v. ALOK VERMA 107
-. l
. "
5. Incised wound of 3 cm x 0.5 cm m_uscle deep on A
back of and middle of(Rt.) upper arm.
1
The injuries on the deceased Chhoutey, aged about 5
years, son of the accused respondent are as follows:-
1.. Incised wound of 3 cm x 1 cm. size skull deep till B
upper cavity of skull. This wound _was 2 cm above
the right eyebrow on the right side of the skull. Skull
bone was broken. Thereafter, it was found that-brain
- and brain membrane was also cut and blood mix ·
fluid was present in t~e cavity of skull. c
2. Incised wound 3 cm x 1 cm size bone deep which
was above the right eye .brow
.
on. the right side of
the forehead.
~·· l, .

Incised woµnd 2 cm x 1 cm size just above the injury D
.- . 3.,
~
!~ N -2.i -. ,. . , " .. ~ t. ·,:_
0 .

4.-. ·incised wound 2cmx1 cm size muscle deep in the
middle of the front of the neck..
E
5. Contusion 8 cm x 6 cm size upon the skull.

The injuries on Rahul, aged about 10 years, son of the
deceased and the accused respondent, are as follows :-
l . 'Alt ' ; ' -1 . . ' '
1. Contusion of 8 cm x 3 cm size on the front of the F
neck.
. .
2. Incised wound 5 cm x 1 cm breathing duct deep in
the front of the neck. This injury was very close to
the injury No.1 On dissection, blood vessels,
nerves, muscles and breathing duct etc. were found G
to be cut.
. 3.. ,. Incised wound 4 cm x 1 cm skull deep. This injury
was 3 cm above the left eye, on the left side of the
H
108 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 11 S.C.R.

A skull bone of skull, brain and brain membrane were
found to be cut. Blood mix fluid was found to
present in the cavity of skull.

4. Incised wound 3 cm x 1 cm muscle deep 12 cm
above the middle of forehead in the front of skull.
B
5. Incised wound 2.5 cm x 1 cm muscle deep behind
the right ear.

The injuries on Uttam Kumar, aged about 8 years, son of
C the deceased and the accused respondent are as follows :-

1. Incised wound 3 cm x 1 cm bone deep in the upper
part of the body.

2. Incised wound 3 cm x 1 cm x deep bone in the
D middle of the forehead.

3. Incised wound 2 cm x 1 cm x skull deep outside the
left eye on the left side of the face. The bone,
muscle, blood vessels, brain and brain membrane
were found to be cut. The fluid with blood was filled
E
in cavity of brain.

4. Incised wound 3 cm x 1 cm bone d~ep, this wound
was close to the outer sides of the right eye.

F 5. Incised wound 2.. 5 cm x 1 cm x breathing duct deep
qn the front of the neck.

6. 12 cm x 3 cm size wound till nose contusion on the
neck.

G The injuries on Kumari Anjali, aged about 2 years,
daughter of the deceased and accused respondent, are as
follows:-

1. 4 cm x 1.5 cm incised wound x deep till cavity of
H skull, 4 cm above the right eye brow on the right
STATE OF U.P. v. ALOK VERMA 109

side of the skull. Under the injury, bone, brain and A
brain membrane under the injury were found to be
cut. Blood mixed fluid was found in the cavity of
brain.

2. 2 cm x 1 cm incised wound deep till cavity of skull 8
above the left eyebrow on the left side of forehead.
Under the injury, bone, brain and brain membrane
were found to be cut.

3. Incised wound 2 cm x 0.5 cm muscle deep below
the chin. c
4. 2 cm x 0.5 muscle deep incised wound on the level
of the thyroid cartilage in the front of the neck.

Apart from the deceased, the injuries on the injured eye
D
witness Priyanka, who was aged about six years when the
incident took place, are as follows :-

1. Towards right on the face in the front of the ear
contusion with red colour 6 cm x 45 cm.
E
2. On right eye and lower eyelid contusion 4.5 cm x 4
cm.

3. Towards left on the face, below the eye contusion
with red colour 2 cm x 1.0 cm.
F
4. Right ear was bleeding and blood clot was present.

These injuries show the brutal manner in which the
deceased were killed, and injuries caused to Priyanka.
Apparently the throats of the deceased were cut with a knife G
and their heads smashed with an axe.

It has come in evidence that the accused had taken a
house on rent and his wife Shikha {deceased) along with her
children were living in that house. On 07.07.2005 when the
H
110 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011) 11 S.C.R.

A brother of Shikha (the complainant) came to the said house he
found the door closed. He opened the door and found the dead
bodies and also his injured niece Priyanka who told him about
the incident.

A blood stained axe was found in the room, while the knife
8
which was also used in committing these horrible crimes had
been concealed by the accused. The shirt of the accused was
blood stained. The accused took the police to the sand where
he had concealed a polythene bag contair:iing the knife which wa
used which was blood stained, and some other items, in
C luding the blood stained shirt. We cannot imagine a more g
astly act and, we are, prima facie, of the opinion that t
is falls in the category of rarest of rare cases in which
death sentence should have been given. The trial court, no
doubt. awarded death sentence to the respondent, but the High
D Court reduced it to life sentence by observing :-

... But on the other side, i.t is to be considered as to what
were the circumstances under vthich the said murders were
caused. Accused Alok Verma was postgraduate in
E Sociology, having failed in getting a job. It seems that due
to financial crisis, he entered into the criminal world, due
to which he had to go to jail. He had been away from his
wife and children for a long time, and in these
circumstances, he became pessimistic and began to
F suspect his wife's character. Advice of his wife to stay away
from criminal activities he could not accept. In absence
of alternative, in such circumstances, his wife's threat to
disclose all of his wrong acts made the situation worse and
. resulted in occurrence of the incident which does not
appear to be committed under any preplan nor for any
G
benefit. but has been caused due to hopelessness and
doubts about the character of the wife wherein he was
doubting that the children were not his. In the above
circumstances considering the decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Prakash Dhawal Khaimath (Patil) Vs.
H
STATE OF U.P. v. ALOK VERMA 111

State of Maharashtra and State of Maharashtra Vs. A
Sandeep @ Babloo Prasad Khairnath (Patil) 2002
Supreme Court Cases (Criminal) 281 the conclusion
arrived is that the present case is not fit for death penalty."

Prima facie, we find the reasoning of the High Court to
B
be strange. Merely because a person is in financial crisis does
not mean that he is at liberty to commit ghastly and gruesome
murders. It appears that the wife of the accused was of a noble
character who tried to reform him, but the accused rather than
being reformed committed these monstrous crimes. We fail C
to understand how the High Court could reduce the death
sentence in these circumstances.

The celebrated Judge of the Allahabad High Court Justice
Mehmood quoted the following Urdu couplet in one of his
judgments while deciding a murder appeal :- D

"Jo Chup Rahegi Zuban-e-khanjar,

Lahu pukarega asteen ka"

Issue notice to the respondent as to why the life sentence E
awarded to him by the High Court should not be enhanced to
death sentence.

Issue notice also on the application for condonation of
delay.
F
N.J. Matter pending