Review of Death Penalty VI

Appellant was convicted and awarded Capital Punishment, confirmed by High Court of Madhya Pradesh. Ruby was married to Sanjay. Appellant ‘coveted’ her; ‘warned’ her, he would not allow her to ‘live with anybody else’; ‘threw acid’, burning and injuring family members, killing her. There is no ‘conjecture’, ‘surmise’ or ‘inference’ in narration of witnesses; evidence is ‘unimpeachable’; Dying Declaration can be given ‘highest probative value’; conviction beyond any ‘reasonable doubt’.

“Crime was committed by Appellant when he was out on bail in another wherein he has been convicted for murder. Earlier incident is totally unrelated to circumstances of this case. Choice of acid does not disclose a cold-blooded plan to murder. Intention seems to have been to severely injure or disfigure. There appears to be no special reason that warrants an imposition of Death Sentence. We find no particular depravity or brutality that warrants a classification as ‘rarest of rare’. Appellant shall undergo Life Imprisonment.”

Hon’ble Justice S.A. Bobde, Yogendra v. State of Madhya Pradesh, [Criminal Appeal Nos. 84-85 of 2019].


Kushal Rao v. State of Bombay, AIR 1958 SC 22 is a watershed Judgment on evidentiary value of Dying Declarations.”

Hon’ble Justice M.R. Shah, State of U.P. v. Veerpal, [Criminal Appeal No. 34 of 2022] decided on 01. 02.2022.