Bombay High Court Objects To Trial Court Quoting 'Mahabharata' To Hand Over Death Sentence To Parents, Son; Commutes Penalty To Life Term

The Bombay High Court at Nagpur on Wednesday (November 13) while commuting the death sentence of two men and a woman to life term, objected to the reasoning of the Trial Court, especially for quoting Mahabharata verses.

The High Court was dealing with an appeal filed by a family (parents and son) convicted for killing four members of the maternal family over a land dispute.

A division bench of Justices Vinay Joshi and Abhay Mantri took exception to various reasons provided by a Trial Court in Akot City of Akola District, wherein the Trial Judge referred to Mahabharata, highlighted the statistics of murders in past 10 years, one of the convicts being a 'teacher' thus bringing disrepute to the noble profession, etc.

"More interestingly the reasoning assigned by the trial court for awarding capital punishment are quite strange. The trial court has quoted a verse from Mahabharata, which we feel to be an unwarranted exercise," the judges said in the judgment. 

The judges noted that the trial court had reproduced the statistics of offences of murder in Maharashtra in the last 10 years, which reflected that a total of 23,222 such offences occurred. Of these offences, the trial court highlighted that in the last 10 years, incidents of four murders in a single incident were only 19 and thus, the instant case was a 'rarest of rare.'

"According to us, the said approach of the trial court is erroneous, as on the basis of some statistical data, without returning to the facts of this case, the category cannot be decided. In criminal trial each case has its own feature and distinctions. The Court has to evaluate the case strictly on the facts of the case and not to be swayed by the statistics and numbers of similar cases," the judges said.

The bench noted from the facts of the case that on June 28, 2015, one of the convicts (Dwarkabai) was sowing cotton seeds in the land parcel, which she got through a court order from her real brothers, after a protracted land dispute. One of her brothers - Dhanraj objected to her act and there was an altercation between the siblings. To pacify the situation, Dhanraj's son Shubham intervened and Dwarkabai accused him of inappropriately touching her. She later on phone called her husband Haribhai, her son Shyam and Mangesh (who was a minor at the relevant time).

Soon after arriving outside Dhanraj's house, Haribhai, Shyam and Mangesh, who were armed with deadly weapons, started assaulting Shubham mercilessly, and when Dhanraj and his other son Gaurav tried to intervene and save Shubham, they too were assaulted and done to death. When Dwarkabai's another brother Baburao (with him also she had a dispute over land) tried to pacify the situation, he too was assaulted with weapons, his sons then tried to rush him to a hospital but they were blocked from doing so and he was further assaulted by the trio. 

The entire scenario ended with all the four - Dhanraj, Baburao, Shubham and Gaurav dying on the spot.

The judges noted that the FIR which was immediately registered, did not mention Dwarkabai's name as to if she assaulted anyone or possessed any weapons. The judges further noted that Dwarkabai's name surfaced only when the police recorded the statements of the witnesses. They noted that the trial court convicted and handed death to Dwarkabai only on the ground that she phone called the other three accused and shared common intention. This the judges held was an error on the part of the trial court and thus, acquitted her from all the charges.

"We may say that the incident was occurred on a momentary quarrel. Before short time from the occurrence, nothing was planned or arranged, but, when accused learnt that Dwarkabai was manhandled, they got annoyed and rushed for her safety. They assaulted Shubham and only because the rest three came to the rescue of Shubham, in succession they have also been done to death," the judges opined.

Besides multiple murders, the bench said it could see no other "uncommon feature" to carve out the exception that this case was a 'rarest of rare.'

"It is not a case of brutal killing of defenseless or vulnerable section of the society, namely women or minor children. Moreover, there was no motive for the accused to kill all the four deceased. Unfolded evidence discloses that when three accused received a call from Dwarkabai, they lost temper, and in retaliation, assaulted the deceased by the weapons which they brought and killed all four. The circumstances do not indicate that life imprisonment is altogether inadequate punishment compelling the Court to arrive at a conclusion that alternative mode would result into failure of justice," the bench opined.

In its 106-page judgment, the bench noted that the conduct of Haribhau and Shyam, while in jail was 'satisfactory' and that there were possibilities of reformation and therefore commuted their sentences to life imprisonment of 14 years and 30 years, respectively. 

Appearance:

Advocate RM Daga appeared for the Appellants.

Additional Public Prosecutors SS Doifode and AM Badar represented the State.

Case Title: State of Maharashtra vs Haribhau Telgote (Criminal Confirmation Case 4 of 2024)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 590

Click Here to Read/Download Judgment