TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court Upholds Death Sentences for General Vaidya Murder</h1> <h3>State Of Maharashtra Etc. Etc. Versus Sukhdeo Singh And Anr. Etc. Etc.</h3> State Of Maharashtra Etc. Etc. Versus Sukhdeo Singh And Anr. Etc. Etc. - 1992 AIR 2100, 1992 SCR (3) 480, 1992 SCC (3) 700, JT 1992 (4) 73, 1992 (2) SCALE ... Issues Involved:1. Criminal Conspiracy2. Identification of Accused3. Evidence of Handwriting Expert4. Section 313 of CrPC5. Conviction and SentencingSummary:1. Criminal Conspiracy:The prosecution alleged that a conspiracy was hatched to assassinate General Vaidya post his retirement, involving several accused including absconding ones. The prosecution's evidence included hiring a flat in Pune, purchasing a motorbike, and various activities suggesting a conspiracy. However, the court found the evidence insufficient to establish a criminal conspiracy beyond reasonable doubt, particularly due to the lack of direct evidence and unreliable identification of the accused.2. Identification of Accused:The prosecution relied on eyewitnesses, including the securityman, General Vaidya's wife, and a cyclist, to identify the assailants. The securityman identified accused No.1 in a test identification parade. However, the court found discrepancies in the testimonies and the identification process, particularly concerning accused No.5, whose identification through photographs was rejected by the trial judge.3. Evidence of Handwriting Expert:The prosecution presented the opinion of a handwriting expert to link the accused to various documents. The court scrutinized the expert's opinion and found it unreliable due to potential bias and lack of corroboration. The evidence was deemed insufficient to establish the identity of the accused through handwriting analysis.4. Section 313 of CrPC:Both accused Nos.1 and 5 made admissions in their statements recorded u/s 313 of CrPC, confessing to their involvement in the murder of General Vaidya. The court held that such admissions could be considered in the trial, and their statements were unequivocal and unambiguous, thus forming a valid basis for conviction.5. Conviction and Sentencing:The trial court convicted accused Nos.1 and 5 for the murder of General Vaidya and sentenced them to death, finding the case fell within the 'rarest of rare' category. The court confirmed the convictions and sentences, dismissing the state's appeal against the acquittal of other accused persons. The court also addressed the procedural aspect of sentencing, ensuring compliance with section 235(2) of the CrPC, and found no prejudice to the accused.Conclusion:The Supreme Court confirmed the death sentences of accused Nos.1 and 5 for the murder of General Vaidya, finding their admissions under section 313 of CrPC sufficient for conviction. The court dismissed the state's appeal against the acquittal of other accused and directed the State of Maharashtra to compensate the amicus curiae for their services.
TaxTMI 