Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Shaik Inthiyaz vs The State Of Ap on 23 August, 2024

Author: K Sreenivasa Reddy

Bench: K Sreenivasa Reddy

           HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH : AT AMARAVATI



      MAIN CASE No.: Crl. Appeal No.353 of 2020 and RT No.1 of 2020

                            PROCEEDING SHEET

SL.      DATE                            ORDER                            OFFICE
NO.                                                                        NOTE

9)     23.08.2024 SRK, J & TMR, J

                          Crl. Appeal No.353 of 2020 has been filed
                   by the appellant/sole accused challenging the
                   conviction and awarding death sentence by the
                   learned VIII Additional District and Sessions
                   Judge-cum-Special Judge for trial of Offences
                   against Women, Nellore in SC No.59 of 2014,
                   dated 06.02.2020.
                          The reference proceedings of the learned
                   VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-
                   Special Judge for trial of Offences against
                   Women, Nellore, vide letter dated 06.02.2020, for
                   confirmation of death sentence awarded by him in
                   SC No.59 of 2014, dated 06.02.2020, is numbered
                   as RT No.1 of 2020.
                          Charge sheet has been filed against the
                   appellant/sole accused for causing death of the
                   deceased D1 and D2.        By his judgment dated
                   06.02.2020, the learned VIII Additional District and
                   Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge for trial of
                   Offences against Women, Nellore, awarded death
       2                                                              SRK, J & TMR, J
                                      Crl. Appeal No.353 of 2020 and RT No.1 of 2020


SL.       DATE                                ORDER                               OFFICE
NO.                                                                                NOTE
                 sentence as against the appellant/sole accused.
                         Today, when the matters came up for
                 hearing, Sri P.Veera Reddy, learned Senior
                 Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant,
                 submitted that the learned Sessions Judge did not
                 consider     the     mitigating   circumstances          while
                 awarding the death sentence and in support of his
                 contention, he relied upon a decision reported in
                 Manoj v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2023) 2
                 SCC 353, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court held
                 thus.

                     "Practical guidelines to collect mitigating
                     circumstances.

                     248. There is urgent need to ensure that
                     mitigating circumstances are considered at
                     the trial stage, to avoid slipping into a
                     retributive response to the brutality of the
                     crime, as is noticeably the situation in a
                     majority of cases reaching the appellate
                     stage.

                     249. To do this, the trial court must elicit
                     information from the accused and the State,
                     both. The State, must - for an offence
                     carrying       capital   punishment   -   at   the
                     appropriate stage, produce material which
                     is preferably collected beforehand, before                   .
                     the Sessions Court disclosing psychiatric
       3                                                           SRK, J & TMR, J
                                Crl. Appeal No.353 of 2020 and RT No.1 of 2020


SL.       DATE                           ORDER                             OFFICE
NO.                                                                         NOTE
                 and    psychological       evaluation     of    the
                 accused. This will help establish proximity
                 (in terms of timeline), to the accused
                 person's frame of mind (or mental illness, if
                 any) at the time of committing the crime and
                 offer guidance on mitigating factors (1), (5),
                 (6) and (7) spelled out in Bachan Singh v.
                 State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 684. Even for
                 the other factors of (3) and (4) - an onus
                 placed squarely on the State - conducting
                 this form of psychiatric and psychological
                 evaluation      close     on    the     heels    of
                 commission of the offence, will provide a
                 baseline for the appellate courts to use for
                 comparison, i.e., to evaluate the progress of
                 the accused towards reformation, achieved
                 during the incarceration period.

                 250. Next, the State, must in a time-bound
                 manner,       collect    additional   information
                 pertaining to the accused. An illustrative,
                 but not exhaustive list is as follows:

                 a) Age
                 b)    Early    family    background      (siblings,
                 protection     of   parents,    any   history    of
                 violence or neglect)
                 c) Present family background (surviving
                 family members, whether married, has
                 children, etc.)
                 d) Type and level of education
       4                                                            SRK, J & TMR, J
                                 Crl. Appeal No.353 of 2020 and RT No.1 of 2020


SL.       DATE                         ORDER                                OFFICE
NO.                                                                          NOTE
                 e) Socio-economic background (including
                 conditions of poverty or deprivation, if any)
                 f) Criminal antecedents (details of offence
                 and whether convicted, sentence served, if
                 any)
                 g) Income and the kind of employment
                 (whether none, or temporary or permanent
                 etc);
                 h) Other factors such as history of unstable
                 social behaviour, or mental or psychological
                 ailment(s), alienation of the individual (with
                 reasons, if any) etc.


                 This information should mandatorily be
                 available to the trial court, at the sentencing
                 stage. The accused too, should be given
                 the same opportunity to produce evidence
                 in      rebuttal,   towards       establishing   all
                 mitigating circumstances.

                 251.      Lastly,   information     regarding    the
                 accused's jail conduct and behaviour, work
                 done (if any), activities the accused has
                 involved themselves in, and other related
                 details should be called for in the form of a
                 report from the relevant jail authorities (i.e.,
                 Probation           and     Welfare         Officer,
                 Superintendent of Jail, etc.). If the appeal is
                 heard after a long hiatus from the trial
                 court's      conviction,    or      High    Court's
       5                                                          SRK, J & TMR, J
                                    Crl. Appeal No.353 of 2020 and RT No.1 of 2020


SL.       DATE                           ORDER                              OFFICE
NO.                                                                          NOTE
                 confirmation, as the case may be - a fresh
                 report (rather than the one used by the
                 previous court) from the jail authorities is
                 recommended, for an more exact and
                 complete            understanding       of     the
                 contemporaneous progress made by the
                 accused, in the time elapsed. The jail
                 authorities must also include a fresh
                 psychiatric and psychological report which
                 will     further     evidence    the   reformative
                 progress, and reveal post-conviction mental
                 illness, if any.

                 252. It is pertinent to point out that this
                 court, in Anil v. State of Maharashtra,
                 (2014) 4 SCC 69, has in fact directed
                 criminal courts, to call for additional material
                 (SCC p.86 para 33)

                        "33.        .....Many      a   times,   while
                 determining the sentence, the courts take it
                 for granted, looking into the facts of a
                 particular case, that the accused would be
                 a menace to the society and there is no
                 possibility of reformation and rehabilitation,
                                                                            ..

while it is the duty of the court to ascertain those factors, and the State is obliged to furnish materials for and against the possibility of reformation and rehabilitation of the accused. The facts, which the courts deal with, in a given case, cannot be the 6 SRK, J & TMR, J Crl. Appeal No.353 of 2020 and RT No.1 of 2020

SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE NO. NOTE foundation for reaching such a conclusion, which, as already stated, calls for additional materials. We, therefore, direct that the criminal courts, while dealing with the offences like Section 302 IPC, after conviction, may, in appropriate cases, call for a report to determine, whether the accused could be reformed or rehabilitated, which depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case."

(emphasis supplied) We hereby fully endorse and direct that this should be implemented uniformly, as further elaborated above, for conviction of offences that carry the possibility of death sentence."

A perusal of the aforesaid judgment goes to show that the Hon'ble Apex Court observed that it is for the trial Court to ensure that mitigating circumstances are considered at the time of awarding punishment. The Hon'ble Apex Court categorically stated to the extent that while awarding death sentence, it is essential that all the mitigating factors have to be considered in doing so. One of the factors that has to be considered is the accused person's frame of mind (or mental illness, if any) at the time of committing the crime and the mitigating factors (1), (5), (6) and (7) as spelt out in Bachan Singh's case. 7 SRK, J & TMR, J Crl. Appeal No.353 of 2020 and RT No.1 of 2020

SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE NO. NOTE Apart from the same, the age and earlier family background of the accused, present family background and type and level of education, his socio-economic background and criminal antecedents are all the factors, which are to be taken into consideration. The behavior of the accused in the jail has also to be taken into consideration, while confirming the death sentence.

Taking into consideration the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment referred to above, we deem it appropriate to call for a report from the jail authorities not only with regard to the soundness of mind of the accused but also with regard to other parameters which are laid down in the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court referred to above.

For the aforesaid reasons, we hereby direct (1) the District Collector, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District, (2) the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District and (3) the Superintendent of Central Prison/District Prison, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District, to send their reports within a period of two (2) weeks from today, in terms of the observations made in this order.

List these matters on 06.09.2024. 8 SRK, J & TMR, J Crl. Appeal No.353 of 2020 and RT No.1 of 2020

SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE NO. NOTE Registry is directed to communicate the copy of this order to (1) the District Collector, Nellore, SPSR Nellore district, (2) the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Nellore, SPSR Nellore district and (3) the Superintendent of Central Prison/District Prison, Nellore, SPSR Nellore district.

______ SRK, J

______ TMR, J Note: