{"id":80058,"date":"2010-02-10T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-02-09T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010"},"modified":"2015-08-16T17:49:46","modified_gmt":"2015-08-16T12:19:46","slug":"the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010","title":{"rendered":"The vs Unknown on 10 February, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
The vs Unknown on 10 February, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: A.L.Dave,&Nbsp;Honourable Ms.Justice H.N.Devani,&Nbsp;<\/div>\n
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCC\/2\/2009\t 19\/ 21\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nCONFIRMATION CASE No. 2 of 2009\n \n\nWith\n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nAPPEAL No. 616 of 2009\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE\n \n\n  \nHONOURABLE\nMS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo be\n\t\t\treferred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT \n\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nNURULHUQ\nABDULHAQ SAIYED \n\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nMAULIK G.NANAVATI, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR\nfor\nthe State \nMR MM TIRMIZI for the\nconvicts-Accused. \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nand\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 10\/02\/2010 \n\n \n\nCOMMON\nORAL JUDGMENT<\/pre>\n
(Per
\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE)<\/p>\n
\tIn
\nan incident that occurred on 17.12.2007, in the house of Nurulhaq
\nAbdulhaq Saiyed located on Tandalja road, Vadodara, it is alleged
\nthat said Nurulhaq Abulhaq Saiyed committed murder of his friend Abid
\nAli by severing the head of said Abid Ali with the help of a knife
\nand wrapped the trunk and head of the victim in a plastic sackcloth
\nand put it on the terrace of his house. A search for Abid Ali was
\nstarted, and it is alleged that Nurulhaq informed the parents of
\nvictim Abid Ali that Abid Ali was taken away by some Bank employee.
\nNurulhaq claimed that he met with an accident with bicycle resulting
\ninto some injuries on his person and went to Doctor and took
\ntreatment. When the police started inquiring about Abid Ali, it is
\ncase of the prosecution that they were asked not to make inquiry
\nabout Abid Ali, as he had been taken away by some Bank employee. When
\nit was noticed that the light in the room, which was occupied by
\nNurulhaq, was on and  the room was locked, so also, the door to the
\nstaircase for access to the room was also locked, a suspicion arose
\nand Abdulhaq, father of Nurulhaq informed the police about the same.
\nThe police went to the place, broke open
\nboth the locks and found the rooms in a very disorderly situation
\nwith blood and blood-spots all around. The police went to the
\nterrace, who found there the head and the trunk of the deceased
\nwrapped in a plastic sackcloth.\n<\/p>\n
1.1\t\tThe
\npolice interrogated Nurulhaq and from what was stated by him, the
\npolice made further investigation. Nurulhaq was found in possession
\nof keys of the locks of the door to the room and the door to the
\nstaircase, which he discovered under panchnama at the later point of
\ntime. Ultimately, the police, after investigation, found that there
\nwas sufficient material in the form of circumstances to connect
\nNurulhaq and his family members, namely, Abdul Raheman Abdulhaq
\nSaiyed, Mariyamben Ahmed Mohmad Saiyed, Halimabibi Mohmadsamir Abdula
\nShekh and Aayashabibi Abdulraheman Abdulhay Saiyed, with the crime.
\nTherefore, the police filed charge sheet in the Court of learned
\nChief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara, who, in turn, committed the case
\nto the  Court of Sessions, Vadodara and Sessions Case No. 149\/2008
\ncame to be registered.\n<\/p>\n
2.\tCharge
\nwas framed against all the five accused persons at Exh.8 for the
\noffences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 365, 176 & 114 of
\nthe Indian Penal Code [ IPC  for short], to which all of them
\npleaded not guilty and came to be tried.\n<\/p>\n
3.\tThe
\ntrial Court found that the prosecution was successful in proving the
\ncharges levelled against original accused No.1, Nurulhaq Abdulhaq
\nSaiyed for the offence of murder; whereas, against rest of the
\naccused persons, the trial Court found that the offence  punishable
\nunder Section 201 read with Section 114 of IPC was proved, and the
\nCourt, therefore, recorded conviction of all the accused.\n<\/p>\n
3.1\t\tThe
\ntrial Court convicted original accused No.1 for the offence of murder
\nand after hearing him on sentence aspect, awarded capital punishment
\nobserving that the death was brutal and would fall in the category of
\n rarest of rare cases . He was imposed fine of Rupees One
\nLac, in default, to undergo R.I for one year. In the event he
\ndeposits the amount of fine, an amount of Rs. 75,000\/- was ordered to
\nbe paid to the father of victim Abid Ali as compensation under
\nSection 357(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Confirmation
\nCase No.2\/2009, therefore, arises out of the death sentence awarded
\nto original accused No.1, subject to confirmation by this Court.\n<\/p>\n
3.2\t\tOriginal
\naccused No.1 also came to be convicted for the offence punishable
\nunder Section 365 IPC and was ordered to undergo R.I for five years
\nand to pay a fine of Rs. 5000\/-, in default, to undergo further R.I
\nfor one year.\n<\/p>\n
3.3\t\tSo
\nfar as original accused Nos.2 to 5 are concerned, the charge against
\nthem was that of the offence punishable under Section 201 read with
\nSection 114 IPC. The trial Court, after convicting them for the said
\noffence, sentenced them to imprisonment for a period of six months
\nwith a fine of Rs. 500\/- each, in default, to undergo R.I for one
\nmonth.\n<\/p>\n
3.4
\nThe convicts have preferred Criminal Appeal No. 616\/2009 to challenge
\ntheir conviction and sentence.\n<\/p>\n
4.\tSince
\nthe Confirmation Case and the Appeal arise out of the same judgment
\nand order, they are heard together and are disposed of by this common
\njudgment.\n<\/p>\n
5.\tWe
\nhave heard learned advocate Mr.Tirmizi for the accused-appellants and
\nlearned A.P.P. Mr.Nanavati for the State, in the Appeal as well as
\nConfirmation Case.\n<\/p>\n
6.\tLearned
\nadvocate Mr.Tirmizi has raised following contentions :-\n<\/p>\n
(1)\tThe
\nprosecution case depends on circumstantial \tevidence and the
\nprosecution has failed to \testablish a complete chain of
\ncircumstances to \tconnect the accused-appellants with the crime.\n<\/p>\n
(2)\tThe
\nprosecution has not been able to establish \tany motive for appellant
\nNo.1-Nurulhaq to \tcommit murder of the victim.\n<\/p>\n
(3)\tThe
\nmanner in which the incident is alleged to \thave taken place is not
\nprobable one.\n<\/p>\n
(4)\tAs
\nper the prosecution case, the incident \toccurred in the room of
\naccused-appellant No.1 \tsituated on the first floor and thereafter
\nthe \tdead body of the deceased was taken to the \tterrace, but, the
\nprosecution has not been able \tto bring any witness who would claim
\nto have \tseen accused-appellant No.1 taking the dead body \tto the
\nterrace.\n<\/p>\n
(5)\tMany
\nof the prosecution witnesses have not \tsupported the prosecution case
\nand have been \tdeclared hostile.\n<\/p>\n
(6)\tThe
\npanchnama drawn by the Investigating Officer \tare not properly proved
\nby the prosecution, as \tthe panch witnesses have not supported the
\n\tprosecution case.\n<\/p>\n
6.1\t\tLearned
\nadvocate Mr.Tirmizi submitted that the trial Court has overlooked
\nthis aspect and has come to the conclusion that the prosecution has
\nsuccessfully proved the guilt of the accused-appellants and,
\ntherefore, the appeal may be allowed.\n<\/p>\n
7.\tReflecting
\non the quantum of sentence, by way of alternative submission,
\nMr.Tirmizi submitted that appellant No.1 was aged only 22 years. He
\nhas no criminal antecedents. The sentence awarded to him is too
\nharsh. He cannot be considered as a menace to the society. In fact,
\nhe was engaged in the work of teaching Abid Ali and he himself was
\nlearning the work of Maulvi. He further submitted that he
\nwould not be menace to the society if he is not awarded death
\npenalty. The death penalty awarded by the trial Court is, therefore,
\ntoo harsh and disproportionate to the crime and may not be confirmed.\n<\/p>\n
8.\tHe
\nsubmitted that there are large number of lacunae in the prosecution
\ncase, benefit of which should go to the accused persons and,
\ntherefore, the appeal may be allowed and the Confirmation Case may be
\ndismissed.\n<\/p>\n
9.\tLearned
\nAdditional Public Prosecution Mr.Nanavati has opposed the appeal. He
\nsubmitted that the incident had taken place in a closed room
\nexclusively in possession of appellant No.1. The victim had been done
\nto death by appellant No.1 in a ruthless and merciless manner and
\nthereafter his dead body came to be placed on terrace as if nothing
\nhad happened. This would show that appellant No.1 had planned to
\ncommit the crime. Even after the incident, appellant No.1 uses his
\ningenuity and concocts a story about accident with bicycle and injury
\non his person to show that the bloodstains found on his clothes were
\nbecause of accidental injury. Mr.Nanavati submitted that the appeal
\nmay, therefore, be dismissed and the death sentence awarded to
\nappellant No.1 may be confirmed.\n<\/p>\n
10.\tWe
\nhave examined the record and proceedings of the case in the context
\nof what was argued before us.\n<\/p>\n
11.\tAt
\nthe outset, we record that the prosecution case depends on
\ncircumstantial evidence. However, we notice certain undisputed facts
\non record, viz., (1) The incident occurred on 17.12.2007 at about
\n3.00 in the afternoon, (2) Appellant No.1 used to occupy room on the
\nfirst floor and was having key of the lock to the  door to that room.
\nHe also had key of the lock to the door to the staircase, (3) The
\ndead body was found on the day of the incident in the late evening
\nhours from the terrace of the house of accused-appellant No.1 and
\nthere was none in the room or the terrace. There was no one when the
\nplace was searched. The room was found to be having bloodstains at
\nthe multiple places. So also the blood like stains were found wiped
\nout. The case of appellant No.1 is that he did not know the incident,
\nbut, from his conduct it is clear that he and the deceased were
\nnoticed together. It can be recorded from the prosecution case that
\nthe victim had gone with a Bank employee. It should necessarily  mean
\nthat he was in the company of the victim till that point of time and
\nthe incident happened somewhere around 1.15 P.M. The panchnama of the
\nplace of the incident would show that everything in the room were
\nlying helter-skelter. There were blood-marks. There were stains of
\nblood on the wall and other parts of the room. At some places, blood
\nlike stains were found wiped out.\n<\/p>\n
(4)\tThe
\ndead body was found wrapped in plastic sackcloth with head and trunk
\ntotally severed.\n<\/p>\n
12.\t\tThe
\nabove factors would establish that the place of incident was the room
\noccupied by appellant No.1 and the dead body was then carried to the
\nterrace. The injuries on the dead body and the condition of the dead
\nbody would also establish the case to be that of murder and brutal
\none. The injuries described in the post-mortem notes (Exh.18) are 13
\nin number. They were all ante mortem with majority of them being
\nincised wounds. The main injuries are injury Nos.1 to 5, which are
\ndescribed as under :-\n<\/p>\n
(1)\tIncised
\nwound over the back of the neck \textending on both sides, measuring
\n10×3 cm, \tmuscle deep, horizontally placed.\n<\/p>\n
(2)\tHorizontally
\nplaced incised wound over the back \tof the neck, measuring 7×1 cm x
\nmuscle deep \tintermingling on the right side with injury \tNo.1.\n<\/p>\n
(3)\tCut
\nthroat injury present over the neck leading \tto total decapitation,
\nit is placed horizontally \ton the neck at the level of C4, lower
\npart, \tcutting in its course the structure passing \tthrough the neck
\nat the same level including \tskin, soft tissue, neuro vascular
\nbundle, \tthyroid, esophagus, trachea, body of C4 lower \tpart with
\nclean cut margin, clear edges on both \tsides, whole injury of exposed
\ntissue are solid \twith blood.\n<\/p>\n
(4)<\/span><\/p>\n
Incised wound horizontally \tplaced on the front \tof the neck, 1 cm
\nbelow \tlower margin of above \tinjury, 4.5 cm above the \tsternal 5×1
\ncm x \tsubcutaneous tissue deep.\n<\/p>\n
(5)<\/span><\/p>\n
\tLinear incised wound, over right submandibular \tregion slightly
\ncurved, 5 cm length x skin deep \twith tailing medially.\n<\/p>\n
12.1\t\tThe
\nother injuries, particularly injury Nos.12 & 13 would reflect
\nresistance by the deceased against assault and other injuries are
\nresult of possible scuffle. However, the fact remains that the
\ndeceased was done to death in a very brutal manner by severing the
\nhead from the trunk and in doing so, several attempts were required
\nto be made, as there are multiple incised wounds on the neck. The
\ncause of death is shock and haemorrhage following decapitation.\n<\/p>\n
13.\tNow,
\ntherefore, the question that arises for determination is, who
\ncommitted the murder of Abid Ali. In this context, there is a series
\nof circumstances. Shamimbanu, examined as PW.25 at Exh.59, who is a
\nneighbour, has noticed the victim and appellant No.1 together around
\n1.15 P.M on the date of the incident. She says that around that time,
\nappellant No.1 and Abid Ali were attending to the lesson. Around 3.30
\nP.M., she was inquired about Abid Ali and she told that she had seen
\nhim sometime back. They found that cycle was lying down below. They
\nwere informed by Mezbil, daughter of the witness that she had seen
\nAbid going on the bicycle of appellant No.1. The witness sent her
\ndaughter to the house of appellant No.1 to inquire about Abid Ali and
\nappellant No.1 told her that he was not at his home. On inquiry from
\nAsharfi, she was told that some Bank person had taken  him away. The
\npolice was inquiring about Abid and in the evening, while they were
\nstanding in the compound, appellant No.1 met her and she inquired
\nfrom him as to what he was doing when the Bank person took away Abid
\nand then he replied that the Bank person had taken Abid towards
\nmasjid. Appellant No.1 indicated that he had met with an accident and
\nshowed bandages.\n<\/p>\n
\tThe
\nwitness has been cross-examined. She denies the suggestion that
\nappellant No.1 never met her on that day and that she is not telling
\nthe truth.\n<\/p>\n
13.1\t\tFaijal,
\nwho is examined as PW.24 at Exh.58, says that he saw Abid and
\nappellant No.1 going on a bicycle towards the house of appellant
\nNo.1. Abid was sitting on the carrier of the bicycle. This he saw
\naround 2.00 P.M. on the day of the incident.\n<\/p>\n
13.2\t\tThe
\nevidence of Asarfiben, examined as PW.4 at Exh.23, indicates that
\nusually appellant No.1 and Abid used to attend to lesson together.
\nShe telephoned appellant No.1 around 2.45 P.M, to inquire as to where
\nhad Abid gone and appellant No.1 informed her that some Bank person
\nhad come to inquire about Abid.\n<\/p>\n
13.3\t\tOn
\nnoticing light in the room, police broke open the locks and noticed
\nthe condition of the room as indicated in the panchnama (Exh.27. It
\nis not in dispute that the said room was under the exclusive use of
\nappellant No.1. Besides usual household, what was noticeable was the
\nbloodstains on the floor. In the second room also there were reddish
\nstains with palm marks on the wall. There were scattered bloodstains
\non the western wall as well as southern wall and flooring.  Mattress
\nalso contained bloodstains. There were blood-marks in the gallery as
\nwell as staircase leading to the terrace.  The keys of the locks
\nwhich were broken open, have been seized under panchnama (Exh.35)
\nunder Section 27 of the Evidence Act.  The keys were discovered by
\nappellant No.1 from the drawers of the table lying in the house.
\nPanch witness Rameshbhai Gababhai Solanki and Manoj Mangalbhai Gohil
\nare examined at Exhs.34 & 36 respectively, and both of them have
\nnot supported the prosecution case. However, the discovery part is
\nproved through the deposition of the Investigating Officer (Exh.83).\n<\/p>\n
13.4\t\tSimilarly,
\nthe knife used in the commission of the offence has been discovered
\nunder the panchnama (Exh.44) at the instance of appellant No.1. Panch
\nwitnesses Tusharbhai Govindbhai Rohit (Exh.42) and Nikesh Amarsing
\nJadav (Exh.43) have not supported the prosecution case. However, the
\nInvestigating Officer in his deposition (Exh.83) has proved the
\ndiscovery. The Doctor in his deposition has stated that the injuries
\nwere possible with the muddamal knife.\n<\/p>\n
13.5\t\tThe
\nknife, which was discovered at the instance of appellant No.1, was
\nfound to be stained with blood and the F.S.L.Report would indicate
\nthat the blood was of the group of the deceased, viz. ‘O’.\n<\/p>\n
14.\tAppellant
\nNo.1 himself suffered injuries on his person, which he has tried to
\nexplain by attributing the same to an accident. In this context, he
\nhad taken treatment from Dr.Ishaq Ibrahim Bhana, examined at Exh.48.
\nHe states in his deposition that on 17.12.2007, in the evening hours,
\nappellant No.1 had approached him with an injury on his leg.
\nAppellant No.1 was in the company of Ismailbhai and he stated that he
\nhad met with an accident with an auto-rickshaw, near Raopura. The
\nwitness stated that he had gone to the house of Asharfiben and at
\nthat time she was crying and had become unconscious. However, he
\ncould not know the cause. This witness has not supported the
\nprosecution case wholly and, therefore, he was declared hostile.\n<\/p>\n
14.1\t\tDuring
\nhis cross-examination through defence, the witness  admitted that
\nwhen appellant No.1 had come before him, he was bleeding from his
\nleg. The injury was of superficial nature and such injuries are
\npossible by cycling.\n<\/p>\n
15.\tAppellant
\nNo.1’s clothes were stained with blood. The stains were found both on
\npyjama and kurta. His handkerchief had also
\nbloodstains. The FSL Report Exh.92 would indicate that the
\nbloodstains on the pyjama and the handkerchief were of group
\n A , which were of his own blood-group; whereas bloodstains on
\nhis kurta were of blood-group  O , which was of the
\ndeceased. This find of bloodstains of the group of the deceased on
\nthe clothes of appellant No.1 has remained unexplained by the
\ndefence. The injury on the person of appellant No.1 is explained, so
\nalso the find of bloodstains on his handkerchief and can be accepted.
\nBut, find of bloodstains of the group of the deceased on the clothes
\nof appellant No.1 has remained unexplained, which would be a very
\nstrong circumstance to connect appellant No.1 with the crime.\n<\/p>\n
16.
\nSo far as Appellant Nos.2 to 5 are concerned, the evidence against
\nthem is  very scanty in nature All that is alleged against them, is
\nthat when the inquires were made about Abid at the house of appellant
\nNo.1, the father of appellant No.1 and three lady members of the
\nfamily were standing outside the house and they replied that they
\nshould not go on making such inquiries, as their son had also then
\nnot come back. Who those ladies were, is not stated by witness Adil
\nexamined at Exh.62, who had gone to inquire. Beyond this, there is no
\nother attribution. By no stretch of imagination, it can  be said that
\nany case of destroying evidence is made out against appellant Nos.2
\nto 5 by this evidence and, therefore, the conviction of these
\nappellants cannot be upheld.\n<\/p>\n
17.\tThe
\nsum total of the foregoing discussion is that the following
\ncircumstances connect appellant No.1 with the offence:-\n<\/p>\n
(1)\tAppellant
\nNo.1 and the deceased were seen together in company of each other in
\nproximity of time and place of the incident.\n<\/p>\n
(2)\tThe
\nincident had occurred in the rooms which were exclusively used by
\nappellant No.1. The access to the room was not possible by
\nanyone-else, as the rooms were locked.\n<\/p>\n
(3)\tThe
\nrooms were stained with blood-marks all over. There were marks of
\nblood going from the room to the terrace.\n<\/p>\n
(4)\tAppellant
\nNo.1 has discovered the weapon and the keys to the rooms.\n<\/p>\n
(5)\tKurta
\nworn by appellant No.1 was stained with blood of the group of victim
\nAbid, which has not been explained by the defence. We are, therefore,
\nof the view that the trial Court was justified in convicting
\nappellant No.1 for committing murder of Abid. The appeal, therefore,
\nmust fail to that extent.\n<\/p>\n
18.\tHowever,
\nso far as appellant Nos.2 to 5 are concerned, as discussed above,
\nthere is no evidence to show their involvement in the destruction of
\nthe evidence. Therefore, their conviction cannot be upheld and the
\nappeal would merit acceptance to that extent.\n<\/p>\n
19.\tNow,
\ncomes the question on the quantum of punishment. The trial Court has
\ndeemed it fit to award capital punishment to appellant No.1 and this
\nCourt is required to examine, whether death penalty would be the
\nright and just penalty.\n<\/p>\n
19.1\t\tIn
\nthis regard, it may be observed that the age of appellant No.1 was
\nabout 22 years when the incident occurred. He and the victim used to
\nstudy together and there is no whisper of evidence about any
\nanimosity or motive for appellant No.1 to commit murder of Abid.
\nAppellant No.1 has no criminal antecedents. There is no material to
\nshow that there is any chance of appellant No.1 getting involved in
\nsimilar offence in future or that his remaining alive would be a
\nburden and risk to the society’s safety, security and peace.\n<\/p>\n
20.\tIt
\nis undoubtedly true that the murder was committed in a ruthless
\nmanner. The head had been chopped off from the trunk by making
\nmultiple attempts, as is evident from the multiple horizontal incised
\ninjuries found on the neck. But, there is no evidence to know the
\ngenesis of the incident and, therefore, in our view, this cannot be
\nconsidered as a  rarest of rare case  where extreme penalty of
\ndeath is the only remedy. We are, therefore, of the opinion that
\ndeath penalty awarded by the trial Court cannot be confirmed. We
\ntherefore, commute the death penalty to the penalty of imprisonment
\nfor life, so far as appellant No.1 is concerned, without disturbing
\nthe imposition of fine and the direction for compensation.\n<\/p>\n
21.\t\tFor
\nthe foregoing reasons, (1) Criminal Appeal No. 616\/2009 stands partly
\nallowed. Conviction of Appellant No.1, Nurulhaq Abdulhaq Saiyad for
\nthe offence of murder of Abid Ali Saiyad is confirmed, but, the death
\npenalty awarded by the trial Court is not confirmed. Appellant No.1
\nis ordered to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of
\nRs.1,00,000\/- {Rupees One Lac], in default, to undergo R.I for one
\nyear. We also confirm the direction of the trial Court to pay
\ncompensation to the father of the victim, in the event fine is paid.\n<\/p>\n
(2)\tConviction
\nand sentence of Appellant No.1 for the offence punishable under
\nSection 365 IPC is also confirmed. Both the sentences to run
\nconcurrently.\n<\/p>\n
(3)\tThe
\nappeal is allowed, so far as Appellant Nos.2 to 5 are concerned. They
\nare acquitted of the charges levelled against them. Their bail bonds
\nshall stand cancelled. Fine paid by them shall be refunded to them.\n<\/p>\n
(4)\tThe
\nConfirmation Case stands disposed of without confirming the death
\nsentence and altering the death sentence awarded to appellant No.1,
\nNurulhaq, to life imprisonment.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t[A.L.Dave,J.]<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t[Harsha
\nDevani,J.]<\/p>\n
(patel)<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court The vs Unknown on 10 February, 2010 Author: A.L.Dave,&Nbsp;Honourable Ms.Justice H.N.Devani,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CC\/2\/2009 19\/ 21 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL CONFIRMATION CASE No. 2 of 2009 With CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 616 of 2009 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE HONOURABLE […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-80058","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nThe vs Unknown on 10 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The vs Unknown on 10 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-02-09T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-08-16T12:19:46+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"19 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The vs Unknown on 10 February, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-16T12:19:46+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010\"},\"wordCount\":3593,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010\",\"name\":\"The vs Unknown on 10 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-16T12:19:46+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The vs Unknown on 10 February, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"The vs Unknown on 10 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The vs Unknown on 10 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-02-09T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-08-16T12:19:46+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"19 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The vs Unknown on 10 February, 2010","datePublished":"2010-02-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-16T12:19:46+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010"},"wordCount":3593,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010","name":"The vs Unknown on 10 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-02-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-16T12:19:46+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-unknown-on-10-february-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The vs Unknown on 10 February, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/80058","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=80058"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/80058\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=80058"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=80058"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=80058"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}