DATE: 23-01-2001 2001-(107)-CRLJ -3217 -MP

While assailing the sentence of death, Mr. Dutt submits that it is not rarest of the rare case and as such extreme penalty of death is not called for. Mr. Naik, Addl. Advocate General, however submits that house of the deceased was set on fire in which two persons have died and on account of this gruesome double murder, the learned Judge did not err in imposing the extreme penalty of death.
Having appreciated the rival submissions, we are of the opinion that case found proved against the accused persons cannot be said to be rarest of the rare case to warrant extreme penalty of death. According to the prosecution, accused persons being members of unlawful assembly, in furtherance of their common object, had intended to kill Moolchand and infact succeeded in that. And although the accused persons knew that Moolchand’s son was in the room in which he had concealed himself, their initial object was to kill Moolchand only. It was unfortunate that Moolchand concealed himself in the house where his son was also sleeping. In such a situation, we do not consider it to be rarest of the rare case to warrant the extreme penalty of death.