Holding

The Supreme Court upheld the death sentence, holding that the crime was pre‑meditated, gruesome, and fell within the 'rarest of rare' category with no mitigating circumstances.

Summary

Umashankar Panda was convicted under IPC sections 302 and 307 for murdering his wife and two daughters with a sword and attempting to murder his three other children, who survived with grievous injuries. The trial court sentenced him to death, a judgment affirmed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court. In a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court, the appellant argued that the killings were not pre‑planned and arose from sudden provocation, seeking reduction of the death sentence. The Court examined the nature of the injuries (64 sword wounds), the absence of any provocation, and the cold‑blooded, gruesome manner of the crime, concluding that there were no mitigating circumstances and that the case fell within the "rarest of rare" category. Relying on precedents concerning the award of capital punishment, the Supreme Court upheld the conviction and the death sentence, dismissing the appeal.

Issues considered

The appropriateness of the death sentence under the 'rarest of rare' doctrine
Whether the murders were pre‑meditated or committed under sudden provocation
Whether any mitigating circumstances existed that could warrant reduction of the death sentence

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973s. 313, s. 354(3)
Indian Penal Code, 1860s. 201, s. 302, s. 307

Subjects

murderattempt to murderdeath penaltyrarest of rarepremeditated murderaggravating circumstancesmitigating circumstancescapital punishmentspecial leave petitioncriminal appeal

Judgment

)
A UMASHANKAR PANDA
v.
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

FEBRUARY 28, 1996

B [DR. AS. ANAND AND K. VENKATASWAMI, JJ.]

Criminal Law :

Indian Penal Code, 1860: Sections 302 and 307.

C Murder of wife and two children-Attempt to murder other three
children- Provocation-Absence of-Commission of crime-Premediated
one- Not due to sudden provocation or mental derangement-Held : offence
grnesome, cold-blooded, heinous, atrocious and cruel -No mitigating cir-
cumstances but only aggrevating circumstances--"Rarerest of rare
-
D cases''-Death sentence imposed by courts below upheld.
Epistol01y jurisdiction-Exercise of by Supreme Court-Letter Petition
from convict facing death sentence-Treating of as Special Leave Peti-
tion-Grant of leave and hearing of the criminal appeal.

E The appellant was convicted under Sections 302 and 307 of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860 and was sentenced to death.

According to the prosecution, the appellant committed murder of his
wife and two daughters at night by inflicting several injuries by sword. He
further caused grievous injuries to his daughter and two sons with intend
F to commit murder. However, these three survived. On receiving informa-
tion that many persons have sustained injuries and some of them have
died at the residence of the appellant, P.W. 3, the Police officer, reached
the spot and found the appellant's daughter and sons in a seriously injured
cond!tion. A blood stained sword was recovered on .the spot. He was
G arrested on the same day and during investigation, it was found that he
made extra judicial confession of having committed murder of his wife and
children before, P.W. 6 and P.W. 7. A case was registered and a post-mor-
ten was held.

On the basis of the evidence adduced on behalf of the Prosecution
H the Sessions Judge came to the conclu"sion that the charge levelled against
1154
\
UMASHANKAR PANDAv. STATE 1155

the appellant was fully established. The death sentence was confirmed by A
the High Court.

In this appeal it was contended that the murder was not a pre-
planned one and was on account of sudden provocation; and that the death
sentence should be reduced to one of life imprisonment.
B
On behalf of the respondent-State it was contended that the appel-
lant had committed murder of his wife and children without any provoca-
tion against helpless dependents during night; and that the death sentence
awarded to the appellant did not call for any interference.

Dismissing the appeal, this Court
c
HELD : 1.1. The appellant-accused had caused in all 64 sword
injuries to all the six persons including the three deceased persons viz.,
his wife and two children and those injuries speak for themselves about
the gruesome nature of the crime committed by the accused. There was no D
provocation and there is nothing to suggest that there was any quarrel
between the accused and his wife or among any one of the family members.
The way in which the crime was executed clearly shows that it was a
premeditated one and not on account of sudden provocation or any
mental-derangement. [1166-E-F]
E
1.2. The crime indulged in by the accused is undoubtedly gruesome,
cold blooded, heinous, atrocious and cruel. On the facts established, there
appears to be no mitigating circumstances whatsoever, but only aggravat-
ing circumstances which justify the imposition of death sentence. Looking
into the manner in which the crime was committed the weapon used, the F
brutality of the crime, number of persons murdered, the helplessness of
the victims, there can be no other conclusion except the one, the Sessions
Judge and the High Court arrived at to award the capital sentence to the
appellant. [1166-G-H; 1167-A-B]

Anshad and Others v. State of Kamataka, [1994] 4 SCC 381, Jshubha G
Bharatsinh Gohil & Others v. State of Gujarat, [1994] 4 SCC 353 and Suresh
Chandra Bahri v. State of Punjab, [1985] Supp. 1 SCC 80, relied on.

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No.
771 of 1995. H
)
1156 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996) 2 S.C.R.

A From the Judgment and Order dated 6.7.95 of the Madhya Pradesh
High Court in A No. 173/95 and Death Reference No.2 of 1995.

Vimal Dave for the Appellant.

K.N. Shukla, Sakesh Kumar and Uma Nath Singh for the Respon-
B dent.

The .Judgment of the Court was delivered by

K. VENKATASWAMI, J. The appellant who is in Central Jail,
C Indore has sent through Superintendent a Petition to set aside the im-
pugned judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Bench at Indore
confirming the death sentence imposed by the First Additional Sessions
Judge, Ujjain. The said Petition was taken on file as Special Leave Petition
and this Court· after granting leave called for the records from the trial
court. The High Court was also requested to transmit to this Court the
D copies each of the judgment of the High Court as well as the trial court.

This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Division Bench
of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Bench at Indore in Death Reference
No. 2/95 and Criminal Appeal No. 173/95. The appellant accused was
E convicted under Section 302 l.P.C. for having committed murder of his wife
Krishna Bai, daughter Jyoti aged 10 years, daughter Rekha aged 16 years
and under Section 307 I.P.C.for attempt to commit murder of his daughter
Kamal aged 10 years, son Balakrishan aged 12 years and another son Sonu
aged 7 years on the intervening night of 20th and 21st February, 1994 in
Village Laxmipura, Police Station Kayatha District Ujjain. The prosecution
F case is as follows :

On the intervening night of 20th and 21st February, 1994, the accused
committed murder of his wife and two daughters and they died on the spot.
He further caused injuries to Kamal (daughter) and two sons Balakrishna
and Sonu with intent to commit murder. However, these three survived
G even after sustaining grievious injuries. P.W. 13, Satnam Singh, Station
House Officer received an annonymous telephonic information that many
persons have sustained injuries and some of them have died at the
residence of the accused. On receiving such information, the Police Officer
reached the spot and found Balakrishna, Sonu and Kamal in seriously
H injured condition. Krishna Bai, Rekha and Jyoti were found to be dead by
\ UMASHANKAR PANDAv. STATE [K. VENKATASWAMI,J.] 1157

that time. The accused was not found inside the house. The said Police A
Officer sent all the injured to hospital for treatment and registered case
No. 1/94, 2/94 and 3/94 regarding the death of the persons referred to
above. He recovered Blood stained sword on the spot. Mat, clothes, lock
and chappal were also found with blood stains and they were also seized.
Stained and unstained earth were also collected from the spot. Site map B
was prepared. An inquest was held and various injuries were noticed on
the bodies of the different persons. The accused was arrested on the same
day and Panchnama was prepared and on questioning, the accused gave
information about sword which he had kept in the wheat field belonging
to Radheshyam. The clothes of the accused, Kurta and Pajama with blood

- stains were also recovered from a trunk. During investigation, it was found C
that the accused made extra judicial confession of having committed mur-
der of his wife and children before Prahlad (P.W. 6) an Rora (P.W. 7)

The autopsy on the body of Rekha ~ged about 16 years was con-
ducted by Dr. Arvind Dashottar (P.W. 3) on 21.2.1994 and the following
injuries were found on the body of the deceased Rekha ·: D
1. A big incised wound extending in four directions from left pinna
as following :

(a) 4" x 2" over left tempero occipital region 0 cut piece of E
occipital bone measuring 1/4"x 1/4" present in the wound.
Dura matter exposed.

(b) 4"x2" from angle of the left eye towards left pinna. Man-
dible bone exposed.
F
(c) Incised wound 2"xl'' from angle of left mandible upto left
pinna.

( d) Incised wound 2"xl" from back of neck towards (L) pinna.

2. Incised wound 3"xl/2" below injury No. 1 over accipital region. G
3. Incised wound over skull (L) parietal region 3"xl/2".

4. Incised wound over front parietal region 5 1/2"xl". Parietal bone
incised. 5 1/2" membrane cut at the middle with brain matter
incised 1/2" below membrance parietal lobe of brain. H
j
1158 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] 2 S.C.R.

A 5. Incised wound over (L) shoulder on top l 1/2"xl/2" muscle deep.

6. Incised wound over base of (R) Thumb l"xl/2".

7. Incised wound (L) Dorsal aspect of hand 2"x 1/2".

B 8. Incised wound (L) fore arm dorsal aspect 2"xl/2".

9. Incised wound Palmar aspect of (L) hand 3"x 1/2" below little
and Ring finger. All these injuries were antemortem i~ nature.

In the opinion of the doctor, these injuries were sufficient to cause
c death.

Likewise the autopsy on the body of Krishnabai was conducted by
P.W. 3 with Dr. M.D. Sharma on 21.2.1994 and they found the
-
following injuries :

(1) Incised wound over nose extending upto (L) frontal region
D
5 1/2" x 2" from Rt. to (L) obliquely upwards, muscle deep, ends
tapering.

(2) Incised wound over (L) parietal region 3"xl/2", bone ex-
posed.
E (3) Incised wound near injury No. 2 over vertex 2"xl/4" bone
exposed.

(4) Incised wound 3"xl" over (R) parietal region bone exposed.

(5) Incised wound behind (L) ear l"xl/2".
F
(6) Incised wound on left side face from (L) eye-brow extending
backwards and downwards towards tragus of ear 5 1/2" slicing
effect, skin held out. ·

(7) Incised wound 3"xl/2" (L) side of neck at the base on pest
G aspect 3"xl/2".

(8) Incised wound 1/2"x4" back of chest in between scapular
skin deep.

(9) Incised wound 1/4"xl/2" lataral aspect of (R) arm. mid
H position.
\\
UMASHANKARPANDAv. STATE[K. VENKATASWAMI,J.) 1159

(10) Incised wound dorsum of Hand (R) extending towards A
forearm from knunles upwards tenders and muscles cut. Radious
and ulna bones exposed and cut at the distal ends.

(11) Incised wound 3"xl/2" (R) forearm dorsal aspect above
injury no.
B
(12) Incised wound 4"xl/2" over palmar aspect of (L) band
extending over Wrist.

(13) Incised wound over dorsal aspect of (L) forearm 3"xl" mid
position.
c
-- · (14) Incised wound (L) forearm 4"xl 1/2" muscle and vessels
cu Radious bone cut at mid.

(15) Incised wound over (L) shoulder l/2"xl" muscle deep.

(16) Incised wound (L) Ar~ 1/4" skin deep mid position. · D

(17) Incised wound 3"xl/2" palmar aspect of (L) hand metacar-
pel cut below thumb extending upto wrist.

(18) Incised wound 3"xl/4" over ulnar border of (L) hand; E
metacarpal bone cu~ below little fing~r.

(19) Incised wound 3"xl" over (L) thigh land knee joint.

(20) Incised wound over knee joint (R) 2 l/2"xl/2" muscle deep.

(21) Incised wound over (R) heel attached with a Lag of skin F
posteriorly complete tissue and calcaneous bone cut 3"x around
the heel.

On 21.2.94 P.W. 3 conducted Post-mortem of the dead body
of Jyoti and found the following injuries on the person of the G
deceased:

(i) Incised wound 2"xl/2" over skull right frontal region, skin
deep, bona visible.

(ii) Incised wound 5 1/2"xl 1/2" over skull Top bone exposed. H
1160 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] 2 S.C.R.
l
A (iii) Incised wound 3 11 ~i;2•; over vertex of skull.

(iv) Incised wound 3"xl" (L) side of neck from left border of
mandible horizontal muscle, vessels cut.

(v) Incised wound below injury no. iv. 3"xl" tapering towards
B (L) angle of mouth. There was only a Tag of skin between injury
no. iv and v vessels and muscles cut. -

(vi) Incised wound left hand palmar aspect extending form 2"
over wrist towards palm 4th metacarpal and carpel bones cut.
c (vii) Incised wound L side 3 l/2"xl/2" dorsum of hand extending
from base of index finger arose hand 5th metacarpal bone cut.

(viii) Incised wound over elbow l/2"xl/2".
-
(~)Incised wound over (4) scapular region l"xl/2".
D
(x) Liner abrasion 5" with incised wound at 2 1/2" from start
1/4" below (L) scapular.

P.W. 4 Dr. R.S. Dangad found the following injuries while admit-
E ting Sonu in the Hospital :

(1) Incised wound 6"xl" deep and bone-cutting on the right
parietal region. -4

(2) Incised wound 6"xl" bone deep on the right fronte parietal
F region.

(3) Incised wound 5"xl" bone deep exposing bone left parietal
region.

(4) Incised wound 1 3/4 x l/4"xl/2" on the right nendible.
G
Dr. Nagar (P.W. 12) examined Komal and found the following
injuries:

1. Incised wound 8"xl" bone deep on the L cheek.

H 2. Incised wound 5"xl" on the neck.
\
I

UMASHANKAR PANDAv. STATE [K. VENKATASWAMI, J.] 1161

3. Incised wound 4"xl" bone deep on the right knee muscles A
and vessels cut.

4. Incised wound l"xl/2"xl/2" on the proximal of finger middle
finger.

5. Ring finger was cut upto PIB joint. B
6. Incised wound l"xl/2"xl/2" on the index finger of left hand.

7. Incised wound 2"xl/2"xl/2" on the back of left hand.

8. Incised wound 4"xl/2"xl/2" on the back of left wrist hand C
finger.

9. Incised wound 11/2"xl/2"xl/4" on Rt. wrist dorsal surface.

10. Incised wound 2"xl/2"xl/2" on L hand dorsal surface.
D
11. Incised wound 2"xl/2"xl/2" oblique wrist dorsal surface.

12. Incised wound 1 1/2"xl/2"xl/2" oblique Lt. ·P.A. dorsal
surface long cut.

P.W. 12 Dr. Nagar examined Balakrishna on the same day and found E
following injuries :

1. All fingers amputed from M.P. joint excepting thump.

2. Incised wound on right face extending upto right eye.

3. Incised wound on the left neck 3"x2"x2".
F

4. Incised wound 2"xl"xl" on Rt. chin.

The materials seized were sent for serologist examination and it was
found that it contained human blood. After completion of investigation, G
chargeseet was filed against the accused. The case was committed to the
Court of Sessions. The accused pleaded not guilty. The learned Trial Judge
convicted and sentenced the accused as mentioned above.

The learned trial judge has given special reasons for awarding death
sentence. The accused preferred an appeal to the High Court. It was taken H
)
1162 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] 2 S.C.R.

A up for hearing along with Death Reference. The High Court in its elaborate
judgment found that the fact of commission ?f murder of Krishnabai,
Rekha and Jyoti and attempting to murder, by causing grievous injuries, to
Balakrishna, Sonu and Komal had been proved beyond reasonable doubt
and accused was rightly found guilty for the same. Regarding the sentence,
the learned judges after referring to several judgments of this Court and
B also a Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court found that the
case of the accused fell within the cases of the 'rarest of rare cases' and
there were no mitigating circumstances whatsoever for commission of
gruesome murder of wife and two children. Accordingly while dismissing
the appeal filed by the accused accepted the reference made by the learned
C Additional Sessions Judge.

It is under these circumstances, the present appeal was filed by the
accused who is in jail. Mr. Vimal Dave, learned counsel for the accused
appellant finding the fool proof case of the prosecution did not attempt to
D challenge the conviction recorded by the learned Sessions Judge and
confirmed by the High Court. However, he strenuously argued that there
is a case for reducing the death sentence to one of life imprisonment in
the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case. According to the learned
counsel, the murder was not a pre-planned one and having regard to the
time and place of the incident it must be taken that it was on account of
E sudden provocation and as suggested by the qefence in the cross-examina-
tion of the prosecution witnesses, that the suspicion entertained by the
accused regarding the fidelity of his wife and answer said to have been
given by her led to the incident. According to the learned counsel there
was no mensrea and no motive was suggested by the prosecution for
committing the three murders and causing injuries to the children.
F
"'
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent, however, submitted
that the findings rendered by the trial court as well as by the High Court
on appreciation of oral evidence will go to show that the appellant has
committed the murder in a gruesome manner without any provocation and
G against helpless dependents. As per the decided cases of this Court, the
death sentence awarded to the accused does not call for any interference.

We have considered the rival submissions. Before going into the facts
of this case as found by the trial court and the High Court, it will be useful
-
H to set out the principles laid dvwn by this court in several cases for
UMASHANKARPANDAv. STATE[K VENKATASWAMI,J.] 1163

awarding death sentence. A
In Anshad and Others v. State of Kamataka [1994] 4 SCC 381, a two
Judge bench of this Court presided over by one of us (Anand, J.) has
observed as follows :

"Courts are expected to exhibit sensitiveness in the matter of B
award of sentence particularly, the sentence of death because life
once lost cannot be brought back. This Court has in cases more
than one emphasised that for determining the proper sentence in
a case like this while the court should take into account the
aggravating circumstances it should not overlook or ignore the C
mitigating circumstances. The manner in which the crime was

- committed, the weapons used and the brutality of the lack of it are
some of the considerations which must be present to the mind of
the court. Of course, the High Court has the power and jurisdic-
tion to enhance the sentence of life imprisonment to death but that
power has to be sparingly exercised, in "rarest of the rare cases" D
for 'special reasons' to be recorded. The courts must be alive to
the legislative changes introduced in 1973 through Section 354(3)
Cr.PC. Death sentence, being an exception to the general rule,
should be awarded in the "rarest of the rare cases" for 'special
reasons' to be recorded after balancing the aggravating and the E
mitigating circumstances, in the facts and circumstances of a given
case. The number of persons murdered is a consideration but that
is not the only consideration for imposing death penalty unless the
case falls in the category of "rarest of the rare cases". The courts
must keep in view the nature of the crime, the brutality with which
it was executed, the antecedents of the criminal, the weapons used F
etc. It is neither possible nor desirable to catalogue all such factors
and they depend upon case to case."

In Jashubha Bharatsinh Gohil & Others v. State of Gujarat [1994] 4
sec 353, this Court has observed as follows in paragraph 12 of the . G
judgment:

"It is needless for us to go into the principles laid down by this
Court regarding the enhancement of sentence as also about the
award of sentence of death, as the law on both these subjects is
now well settled. There is undoubtedly power of enhancement H
1164 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] 2 S.C.R. .
)
A available with the High Court which, however, has to be sparingly
exercised. No hard and fast rule can be laid down as to in which
case the High Court may enhance the sentence from life imprison-
ment to death. Each case depends on its own facts and on a variety
of factors. The courts are constantly faced with the situation where
they are required to answer to new challenges and mould the
B sentencing system to meet those challenges. Protection of society
and deterring the criminal is the avowed object of law and that is
required to be achieved by imposing appropriate sentence. The
change in the legislative intendment relating to award of capital
punishment notwithstanding, the opposition by the protagonist of
c abolition of capital sentence, shows that it is expected of the courts
to so operate the sentencing system as to impose such sentence
which reflects the social conscience of the society. The sentencing
process has to be stern where it should be."

D Again in paragraph 14 of the same judgment it was observed that 'it
is only after giving due weight to the mitigating as well as the aggravating
circumstances, that it must proceed to impose the appropriate sentence'.

In Suresh Chandra Balui v. State of Punjab [1995] Supp. 1 SCC 80,
in paragraph 105, this Court observed as follows :
E
"The cold-blooded cruel murder of the innocent children by
none else but by their own real father shows the enormous propor-
tion with which it was committed eliminating almost all members
of the family. We have given our serious thoughts and considera-
F tion and posed the question to ourselves· whether there could be
still a worse case than this where a husband could hatch a con-
spiracy and kill his wife in a most callous and ghastly fashion as in
the present case only on a trifling matter which could have been
sorted out in an amicable manner for which no effort appears to
have been made by Suresh. Not only this but the appellant Suresh
G became thirsty of the blood of his own children for absolutely no
fault of theirs. In the facts and circumstances discussed above, in
our opinion, so far as Suresh Bahri is conserned, the rule of the
rarest of rare cases has to be applied as the present case falls within
the category of the rarest of rare cases and for the perpetration of
H the crime of the nature discussed above. there could be no other
\
\
UMASHANKAR PANDAv. STATE [K VENKATASWAMI, J.] 1165

proper and adequate sentence except the sentence of death as A
there are no mitigating circumstances whatsoever. Having
regard to all the facts and circumstances of the present case as far
as Suresh Bahri is concerned there is no cause for any interference
in the view taken by the two courts below in awarding the death
sentence to him. We, therefore, affirm the conviction and sentence
of death awarded to Suresh by the High Court. In the event of the
B
execution of death sentence, the sentence awarded under Section
201 of the IPC shall remain only of academic interest."

As the commission of the crime has been established beyond
reasonable doubt and as the counsel for the appellant also fairly pleaded C
only for the reduction of sentence, we need not probe into the conviction
aspect once again. We, therefore, proceed on the footing that the ac-
cused/appellant has committed murder of his wife and two children and
attempted to kill the remaining three children, but (to the surprise of the
accused) they escaped with grievous injuries. Our concern in the present
appeal is about the manner of committing the murder, weapons used, the D
position. of the victims and ·the circumstances under which the crime was
committed and to find out whether the case falls under the category of
"rarest of the rare cases" in the light of principles already noticed through
the judgments of this Court.
E
Before that, we may also point out that we have independently and
carefully gone through the evide~~e both oral and documentary and we are
convinced that the convictions of the·appellant for offences under Sections
302 and 307 1.P.C. awarded by the learned Sessions Judge and confirmed
by the learned Judges of the High Court are unassailable and are quite in
accord with oral, documentary and medical evidence . F
.. Now, let us look into the way the accused had carried cut the murder
of his wife and two children and caused grievous injuries to the rest ~f his
children in the course of his attempt to liquidate them also. From the
evidence which has been accepted by the trial court and the High Court, G
the following emerges :

On 20th February, 1994, the accused, his wife and all the five children
took their dinner together before going to the bed and had also viewed the
programme on the television. The accused along with his family members
slept in a room. At about 12-1 on the intervening night of 20th and 21st H
1166 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] 2 S.C.R.
)
A February, 1994, the accused started to kill his wife the help of a sword and
on hearing the shoutings the children woke up. The wife questioned the
accused why he was trying to kill her and the accused without giving any
answer inflicted more injuries on her head, ha~'Cl and fo~t. By that time,
the eldest daughter Rekha tried to save her mother and instead of leaving
his wife from attack, he started inflicting wounds on his first daughter
B Rekha with the same sword. Not satisfied with that, he also inflicted
injuries with the same sword to another daughter and finding that the
sword he had used had been bent, he left that sword and took out another
big sword, kept in a box in the room, and with the help of the second sword,
he imlicted injuries to the other children. All the injured persons fell down
c and as seen earlier, the wife and two children succumbed to the injuries
and the other three children escaped death. It is also in the evidence of
P.W. 7 Rora that the accused after committing the crime, confessed to him
(PW 7) stating "I had slaughtered all of them, how the three left alive". The
above attitude of the accused clearly reveals that he had caused injuries
D with a view to liquidate all the members of his family and he was not happy
to find that inspite of his act his three children had escaped from death.

We have alre.ady given the injuries inflicted on the deceased persons
as well as on the children who escaped death. We find that the accused
had caused in all 64 sword injuries to all the six persons including the three
E deceased persons and those injuries speak for themselves about the
gruesome nature of the crime committed by the accused. Be it noted that
there was no provocation and there is nothing to suggest that there was.
any quarrel between the accused and his wife or among any one of the
. family members. The way in which the crime was executed clearly shows
F that it was a pre-meditated one and not on account of sudden provocation
or any 'mental-derange'. The motive suggested in the course of cross
examination of the prosecution witnesses is also not helpful to the accused
inasmuch as he has pleaded alibi in his statement (under Section 313 Cr.
P.C.) and that has also been taken note of by the trial court as well as by
the High Court. As pointed out earlier, both the Sessions Judge and the
G High Court have given special reasons for awarding death sentence and we
are also of the opinion that the crime indulged by the accused in undoub-
tedly gruesome, cold blooded, heinous, atrocious and cruel. We are also
satisfied that on the facts established on the record, there appears to be
no mitigating cir~~mstance whatsoever, but only aggravating circumstances
H which justify the imposition of death sentence. If we look into the manner
\
- \ UMASHANKARPANDAv. STATE[K VENKATASWAMl,J.]

in which the crime was committed the weapon used, the brutality of the A
1167

crime, number of persons murdered, the helplessness of the victims, we
... cannot come to any other conclusion except the one, the Sessions Judge
and the High Court arrived at to award the capital sentence to the
appellant.

In the result, the appeal fails and it is dismissed consequently. B
v.s.s. Appeal dismissed.