/2023 INSC 0090/
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.598­600 OF 2013
AJAI ALIAS AJJU  ETC. ETC.          …APPELLANTS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH    …RESPONDENT
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.337 OF 2014
AND WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.745­748 OF 2015
J U D G M E N T
VIKRAM NATH, J.
Criminal   Appeals   No.598­600   of   2013   have   been
preferred   by   accused   Ajai   alias   Ajju,   Braj   Pal   and   Ravi
respectively.     Ajai   alias   Ajju   has   since   died,   as   reported
1

by   the   learned   counsel   for   both   the   sides.     Accordingly,
Criminal Appeal No.598 of 2013 stands abated. Criminal
Appeal   No.337   of   2014   has   been   preferred   by   accused
Mukesh.  
2. The   above   appeals   assail   the   correctness   of   the
judgment and order of the High Court dated 22.02.2012
whereby the conviction recorded by the Trial Court under
section   302/149   of   the   Indian   Penal   Code 1
  and   other
allied offences, both under the IPC as also the Arms Act,
1959   has   been   affirmed.     However,   sentence   awarding
death   penalty   by   the   Trial   Court   has   been   commuted   to
life   sentence   for   all   the   accused.   Rest   of   the   sentences
have been maintained.
3. Criminal   Appeal   Nos.745­748   of   2015   have   been
preferred by the State of Uttar Pradesh against the above
referred common judgment of the High Court to enhance
the   punishment   to   all   the   four   respondents   and   award
them death sentence.
1  IPC
2

4. Prosecution story in brief is that Braj Pal Singh (one
of the accused) made a complaint to the police station at
Muradnagar,   District   Ghaziabad   at   about   4.30   AM   on
25.08.2007 that early  in the morning at around 3.00 AM
he   heard   the   shouting   and   shrieking   of   Ms   Rashmi,
daughter of his brother Vijay Pal Singh whereupon along
with   other   villagers   he   reached   the   house   of   his   brother
in   the   neighbourhood   only   to   find   that   his   brother   Vijay
Pal Singh, his wife Smt Rajesh were lying on the ground
floor   on   their   cots   with   their   necks   cut   by   sharp   edged
weapons, and further, when he went on the upper floor,
he  saw Nishant, son  of  Vijay  Pal Singh  and  also   Mangal
Singh,   son   in   law   of   Vijay   Pal   Singh   also   lying   dead   on
their cots with their necks also cut. Smt Pinky, daughter
of   Vijay   Pal   Singh   was   also   lying   on   the   ground   floor   in
an  injured  condition.  She  was  taken  to  the  hospital and
admitted   there   whereas   the   dead­bodies   of   the   four
deceased persons were lying on the spot where the crime
3

was   committed.     After   registering   the   case,   the
investigation started.  
5. The   Investigating   Officer   recorded   the   statements   of
the   two   daughters   of   the   deceased   Vijay   Pal   Singh,
namely   Ms   Rashmi   and   Smt   Pinky   (PW­1).   According   to
Smt Pinky and also Ms Rashmi a very shocking sequence
of   events   were   revealed.   According   to   Smt   Pinky,   there
was   enmity   of   her   father   with   his   brother   Braj   Pal   and
son of other brother Indra Pal; further, there was enmity
with   their   neighbour   Mukesh   over   consuming   alcohol.
She further stated that she was sleeping with her parents
on   the   ground   floor.     Her   sister   Ms   Rashmi,   brother­in­
law  Mangal Singh, brother Nishant were sleeping  on the
upper   floors   of   the   house.     At   about   3.00   AM,   she   woke
up   due   to   some   noise   only   to   see   that   her   neighbour
Mukesh,  son  of  Tungal  Singh,  Braj  Pal  Singh,  Ravi,  Ajai
alias   Ajju   were   assaulting   her   parents   with   talwar   and
gandasa .   Mukesh assaulted her with a sword. She tried
4

to   save   herself   but   then   she   fell   down   and   lay   quietly.
She also narrated that Mukesh was saying ‘Abrar makes
sure   that   no   one   is   left   alive.   Kill   all   of   them’   and
thereafter he went upstairs.  She continued to lie close to
her   mother   in   a   state   of   fright   and   shock.     They   left
thinking  that  she was  also  dead.     They  were  also   taking
name   of   one   Pramod.   Both   Abrar   and   Pramod   are   from
village   Noorpur,   which   is   the   in­law’s   place   of   Mukesh.
They used to regularly come to Mukesh and that she had
seen   them   earlier.   When   these   assailants   left   after
assaulting,   her   sister   Ms   Rashmi   came   down   from
upstairs   only   to   see   that   their   parents,   brother   and
husband   had   been   murdered.   Both   the   sisters   ran
outside   shrieking   and   shouting,   and   after   some   time,
Braj   Pal   and   Mukesh   came   along   with   others   and   they
asked   what   had   happened.   They   came   inside   and   saw
the entire place of occurrence and asked Smt Pinky if she
had   recognised   the   assailants.     Out   of   fright   both   Ms
5

Rashmi   and   Smt   Pinky   denied   having   seen   anyone.
Thereafter Mukesh called for the vehicle of Ajai alias Ajju
and   they   brought   them   to   the   hospital.     They   were   also
asking her on the way as to whether she had recognised
any   one,   to   which   she   had   denied.     She   also   requested
the   Investigating   Officer   that   both   of   them   have   told   the
correct   sequence   but   please   keep   to   himself   as   there   is
imminent   threat   to   her   life   and   also   to   her   sister’s   life.
After   narrating   the   entire   story     Smt   Pinky   (PW­1)   fell
unconscious.       Ms   Rashmi,   the   other   daughter   of   the
deceased   has   also   given   a   similar   statement   to   the
Investigating   Officer,   although   she   was   not   examined
during   trial.   After   recording   the   said   statements,   the
Investigating   Officer   completed   all   the   formalities,   sent
the   dead­bodies   for   post­mortem,   informed   the   superior
authorities,   prepared   the   sight   plan,   made   necessary
recoveries from the spot. 
6

6. Smt   Pinky   (PW­1)   suffered   the   following   injuries   as
per the injury report prepared by Dr Rajeev Sharma(PW­
2)   of   the   Sarvodaya   Hospital,   Ghaziabad   who   had
examined her at 5.25 AM on the same day:
“ INJURIES
(i) Amputated   little   &   ring   finger   at   level   of
proximal crease (R)
(ii) Cut   lacerated   wound   on   palmar   aspect   of
(R) hand 8 cm. x 2 cm. red in colour. 2 cm
distal to palmar crease.
(iii) Cut   lacerated   wound   on   front   side   of
forearm   (R)   6   cm.   x   2   cm.   red   in   colour
profusely, bleeding, 5 cm. above wrist joint.
(iv) Cut   lacerated   wound   over   face   extending
from (Lt.) Angle of mouth 5 cm. x 3 cm.
(v) Cut   lacerated   wound   over   neck   5   cm.   x   1
cm. just above upper crease of neck.
(vi) Cut   lacerated   wound   at   base   of   index   and
middle finger on back side 2 cm. x 1 cm. &
2 cm. x 0.5 cm. respectively.
(vii) Cut   lacerated   wound   on   (L)   ear   3   cm.   x   1
cm. red in colour and bleeding.” 
7

X­ray   of   the   neck   and   jaws   was   also   conducted   on   the
same   day   and   a   report   to   that   effect   was   submitted   by
Dr.Rajeshwar Yadav, Radiologist (PW­3).  
7. Post­mortem was conducted in the afternoon on the
same day by Dr K.N.Tiwari (PW­4) and the following ante­
mortem injuries were reported on the four deceased:
“ Smt.Rajesh
Antemortem Injuries (Exhibit Ka­3)
(1) Incised wound over  neck lower  part anteriorly
and   on   Rt.side   8   cm.   x   4   cm.,   bone   deep,   3
cm.   above   supractenal   notch,   soft   tissues   of
neck   including   blood   vessels   and   trachea   are
cut in the wound.
(2) Incised   wound   on   Lt.   side   neck   lower   part   8
cm. below ear 7 cm. x 3 cm. wound in muscle
deep, soft tissue and muscle cut. 
Post­mortem wound
Three   clean   cut   wounds   on   right   hand   dorsum
are present.  Sixe 8 cm. x 5 cm., 7 cm. x 4 cm., 3
cm. x 2 cm., 2.3 cm. apart.
Vijay Pal
Antemortem Injuries (Exhibit Ka­4)
(1) Incised   wound   in   upper   part   of   neck   on
anterior   and   sides   size   10   cm.   x   3   cm.   bone
8

deep, wound is 8 cm. below ear lobule laryux,
hyoid soft tissues and blood  vessels are cut in
the wound.
Post mortem wound
Post  mortem  wounds (1) clean  cut 7 cm  x 3 cm.
on   dorsum   of   Rt.   Hand,   (2)   Abrasion   7   cm.   x   3
cm.   on   dorsum   of   Rt.   Hand   and   1   cm.   x   1   cm.
clean cut over Lt. angle of mouth noted.
Mangal
Antemortem Injuries (Exhibit Ka­5)
(1) Incised wound 25 cm. x 9 cm. on upper part of
neck   and   lower   jaw   on   anterior   and   Rt.   Side,
wound   is   reactive   upto   Vertebrae,   Mandible,
soft tissues of neck muscles, Larix, hyoid and
blood vessels are cut in the wound.
(2) Upper   part   of   wound   in   at   level   of   ear   lobule
and oblique, oblique Incised wound on Rt.side
face,   from   upper   lip   to   ear   11   cm.   x   1   cm.
muscle deep.
Nishant
Antemortem Injuries (Exhibit Ka­6)
(1) Incised wound 9 cm. x 2 cm, oblique, Rt. Side
neck   reaching   upto   mid   line   6cm.   Below   ear
muscle deep.
(2) Incised   wound   5   m.m.   Below   injury   no.1   on
Rt.   Side   neck   reaching   up   to   midline   size
10cm   x   8   cm.,   muscles,   Larynx,   (thyroid
9

cartilage   and   hyoid)   vessels   are   cut   in   the
wound.”
8. After   having   recorded   the   statements   of   the   two
daughters of Vijay Pal Singh, namely Smt Pinky and Ms
Rashmi,   the   Investigating   Officer   Sub­Inspector   Ram
Babu   Saxena   (PW­9)   also   noted   that   mobile   number   of
the   deceased   Nishant   bearing   No.9336780542   was   also
not traceable. Later on, the Investigating Officer arrested
Mukesh   and   Braj   Pal   Singh.     Mukesh   after   his
confessional   statement   also   got   recoveries   made   on   his
pointing out of blood­stained pant,  Khukri  from his house
which   were   taken   into   custody,   sealed   and   memo
prepared.     Motor   cycle   belonging   to   Abrar,   co­accused
was   also   recovered   and   taken   into   custody.     Braj   Pal
Singh   after   giving   his   confessional   statement   also   got   a
blood­stained   gandasa   recovered   from   his   house   which
was taken into custody, sealed and memo prepared.   On
28.08.2007,   co­accused   Ravi   was   arrested   and   in   his
10

confessional statement, and on his pointing out, a blood­
stained  T­shirt   and  a  mobile   phone  LG  Reliance  bearing
No.9336780542 was also recovered from the house of his
mother’s sister. The same was taken into custody, sealed
and   a   memo   prepared.     Ajai   alias   Ajju   was   arrested   on
4.11.2007   and   upon   recording   his   confessional
statement, and on his pointing out, a knife was recovered
from   his   village   hidden   near   a   canal,   the   said   knife   was
taken   into   custody   and   a   recovery   memo   was   prepared.
The recovered articles were sent for forensic examination
to the  Vidhi Vigyan Prayogshala ,  Agra.  
9. After   completing   the   investigation,   a   charge­sheet
was   filed   against   the   four   accused   namely,   Braj   Pal
Singh,   Mukesh,   Ravi   and   Ajai   alias   Ajju.   Two   separate
cases were registered against Mukesh and Ajai alias Ajju
under sections 4/25 of the Arms Act.   In these two FIRs
also a charge­sheet was submitted.   All the matters were
clubbed together and tried by the Trial Court.  
11

10. The   prosecution   examined   13   witnesses.   They   all
supported the prosecution story. All the relevant material
and documents were proved and exhibited.  
11. The   four   accused   gave   their   statements   under
section   313   of   the   Criminal   Procedure   Code 2
    in   which
they   denied   their   involvement   and   alleged   that   they   had
been falsely implicated; they also stated that the recovery
was   not   at   their   instance;   the   witnesses   were   giving
evidence out of enmity; the accused in defence examined
two   witnesses.     Dr   Islamuddin,   a   resident   doctor   in
Sarvoday   Hospital   was   examined   as   DW­1   to   prove   the
medical papers regarding  admission  of Smt Pinky in  the
hospital   Exh.   Kha­1   to     Kha­38.   Smt   Berwati,   wife   of
Mool   Chand,   mother   of   the   accused   Ajai   alias   Ajju   was
examined as DW­2. She stated that her son was arrested
along with Mukesh and Braj Pal, thereafter released and
again after 20 days he was arrested.     
2  CrPC
12

12. The   Trial   Court   vide   judgment   dated   24.09.2009,
after   thorough   scrutiny   and   appreciation   of   the   material
evidence   on   record,   came   to   the   conclusion   that   the
prosecution   had   successfully   brought   home   the   guilt   of
the   four   accused   in   committing   the   murder   of   the   four
deceased   and   attempt   to   murder   of   Smt   Pinky   (PW­1)
who were their close relatives and, accordingly, convicted
them under section 302/149 and section 307 of IPC  and
other  allied offences  under  IPC and Arms  Act, 1959  and
awarded them death sentence and life imprisonment and
other lesser sentences for different offences proved.  
13. Appeals were preferred before the High Court by the
accused   which   were   heard   along   with   death   reference
forwarded by the Trial Court.  Before the High Court, the
appellants Braj Pal, Ajai alias Ajju and Ravi had engaged
separates   counsels   whereas   appellant   Mukesh   was
provided   an   amicus   curiae   from   the   legal   aid.   The   High
Court,   after   considering   the   respective   arguments   and
13

the   material   on   record,   affirmed   the   conviction   recorded
by   the   Trial   Court   of   all   the   offences.     However,   on   the
question   of   sentence,   after   discussing   the   law   on   the
point   and   taking   into   consideration   the   various   other
relevant   factors,   commuted   the   death   sentence   into   life
imprisonment.
14. Aggrieved by the same, present appellants are before
this Court.
15. We   have   heard   learned   counsel   for   the   parties   at
length and also  perused not only the record provided by
the   learned   counsel   for   the   parties   but   also   the   Original
Record of the Trial Court.
16. On   behalf   of   the   appellants,   the   arguments
advanced are briefly recorded as follows:
(i) This   is   a   case   of   solitary   eye­witness,   namely,
Smt   Pinky   (PW­1),   her   testimony   was   that   of   a
witness   related   to   the   deceased   and   also   a
witness having enmity with the appellants and,
14

therefore,   would   not   be   a   reliable   witness   and
ought not to have been relied upon;
(ii) There   is   no   other   evidence   to   corroborate   the
testimony of the solitary eye­witness, PW­1;
(iii) Smt Pinky (PW­1), at the first instance, does not
disclose   the   names   of   the   assailants   to   the
villagers and other family members who collected
on   her   shouting   and   shrieking   nor   did   she
disclose   the   names   of   the   assailants   at   the   time
she  was admitted  to   the  hospital,  therefore,  it  is
a case of improvement;
(iv) There is evidence to show that a dog squad was
summoned in the morning, as such it was a case
of   unknown   assailants   and   that   the   eye­witness
Smt   Pinky   had   actually   not   seen   any   one   and
even   if   she   had   seen   any   one,   she   did   not
recognise   them.   A   dog   squad   would   not   have
been   put   into   action,   in   case   the   names   of   the
15

assailants   were   known;   as   such   this   also
suggests improvement;
(v) No   explanation   as   to   why   Ms   Rashmi   and
Horam,   father   of   the   deceased   Vijay   Pal   Singh,
accused   Braj   Pal   and   grandfather   of   Ravi   were
not   examined,   even   though   they   were   there   at
the place of occurrence; and 
(vi) The   statement   of   Smt   Pinky   (PW­1)   was   not
recorded before the Magistrate under section 164
CrPC which creates a doubt.
(vii) Learned counsel on behalf of the appellant Ravi
raised   an   additional   argument   that   Smt   Pinky
(PW­1)   did   not   take   his   name   before   the
Investigating   Officer   while   giving   her   statement
under   section   161   CrPC.     According   to   him,   the
name   of   Ravi   has   been   taken   for   the   first­time
during   trial   as   an   improvement.   His   client   has
been falsely implicated.
16

(viii) Learned   Amicus   appearing   for   appellant
Mukesh   has   referred   to   various   discrepancies   in
the testimony of the witnesses.
17. On   the   other   hand,   learned   counsel   appearing   for
the   respondent   ­State   submitted   that   the   findings
recorded by the Trial Court and the High Court are based
upon   a   thorough   scrutiny   and   appreciation   of   the
evidence   on   record   and   do   not   require   any   interference.
It   is   further   submitted   by   the   learned   counsel   for   the
State   that   the   appellants   being   close   relatives   and
neighbours   of   the   deceased,   in   order   to   gain   property,
settled their score of enmity by committing a ghastly act
of   brutally   murdering   four   members   of   the   same   family
and   also   attempting   to   murder   the   injured   witness   Smt
Pinky who had been attacked and assaulted on her neck
and   in   the   act   of   protecting   herself   she   lost   a   couple   of
fingers of her upper hand. No leniency needs to be shows
to   them.     The   High   Court   committed   an   error   in
17

commuting   the   death   sentence   to   life   imprisonment.
Accordingly,   the   sentence   of   life   imprisonment   awarded
by the High Court be set aside and that of the Trial Court
of death sentence be restored.
18. The   submissions   advanced   are   being   dealt   with   in
the   same   sequence.     PW­1   is   an   injured   witness.     Her
injuries   have   not   been   challenged.     There   is   no   reason
why   PW­1   would   make   false   implication   and   allow   the
real assailants to go scot­free.  A perusal of her testimony
shows that she has fully supported the prosecution story
as   narrated   by   her   in   her   statement   under   section   161
CrPC.   Even during cross­examination nothing has been
elicited   from   her   which   in   any   way   may   weaken   or
demolish her testimony.  She was a fully reliable witness
and has stated the things in natural course.
19. The   two   daughters   of   the   deceased   Vijay   Pal   Singh
having   seen   the   assailants   murdering   their   family
members and also causing injury to one of them i.e. Smt
18

Pinky   (PW­1)   being   close   relative   rightly   and   wisely   did
not   speak   out   anything   in   their   presence   and   allowed
them to remain in dark that she had actually seen them
committing   the   crime.     At   the   first   instance,   when   the
Investigating   Officer   went   to   the   hospital   to   record   her
statement,   they   immediately   came   out   with   the   true
sequence   of   events   as   they   had   happened.     The
appellants   cannot   gain   anything   out   of   the   above
submission. 
20. The  pressing   of  the dog  squad  into  service  was  also
fully   justified   as   till   that   time   when   the   dog   squad   was
pressed   into   service   in   the   morning   the   names   of   the
assailants   had   not   been   disclosed.     The   dog   squad   had
been pressed into service as per the FIR since the names
of   the   assailants   were   not   known.   It   is   the   case   of   the
prosecution itself that the time when the FIR was lodged
and at the time when Smt Pinky (PW­1) was admitted to
the   hospital,   the   names   of   the   assailants   had   not   been
19

disclosed   deliberately   and   for   justifiable   reasons.   The
daughters   of   the   deceased   Vijay   Pal   Singh   needed   to
protect   their   lives   otherwise   they   would   also   had   been
done to death.
21. Non­examination   of   Ms   Rashmi   and   Horam,   father
of Vijay Pal Singh also has no material bearing. It is the
discretion of the prosecution to lead as much evidence as
is necessary for proving the charge.  It is not the quantity
of   the   witnesses   but   the   quality   of   witnesses   which
matters.   Smt   Pinky   (PW­1)   was   the   injured   witness
having received grievous and life­threatening injuries. We
are not impressed by this argument also. 
22. Non­examination of the statement under section 164
CrPC also has no relevance or bearing to the findings and
conclusions arrived at by the courts below. It was for the
Investigating   Officer   to   have   got   the   statement   under
section   164   CrPC   recorded.   If   he   did   not   think   it
necessary   in   his   wisdom,   it   cannot   have   any   bearing   on
20

the   testimony   of   PW­1   and   the   other   material   evidence
led during trial.
23. Insofar   as   the   attempt   of   the   learned   counsel   for
Ravi is concerned, regarding his name not being taken in
the  statement of Smt Pinky under section  161 CrPC, we
are  of the  view that the same  is factually incorrect.  This
Court has perused the statement of Smt Pinky and finds
that at two places she has taken the name of Ravi, both
during the assault and otherwise also.
24. Learned   Amicus  for   the  appellant  Mukesh  has  tried
to point out several discrepancies and inconsistencies in
the evidence. We need not go into details as the same are
minor   and   do   not   have   any   impact   on   the   findings
recorded by the courts below.
25. For   all   the   reasons   recorded   above,   we   do   not   find
any infirmity in the order of the High Court affirming the
conviction   of   the   appellants.     Accordingly,   Criminal
Appeal   Nos.598­600   of   2013   and   Criminal   Appeal   No.
21

337   of   2014   are   liable   to   be   dismissed   and   are
accordingly   dismissed.     Insofar   as   the   appeals   filed   by
the State are concerned for enhancement of sentence, we
find   that   the   High   Court   has   given   sound   and   cogent
reasons for commuting death sentence into life sentence.
Accordingly,   the   Criminal   Appeal   Nos.745­748   of   2015
also stand dismissed. The appellants are in custody and
they will serve out their sentence.
26. Pending applications, if any, are disposed of.
 
……................................J.
[B.R. GAVAI]
.………….........................J.
[VIKRAM NATH]
NEW DELHI
FEBRUARY 15, 2023. 
22