STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. MANOHAR KASHINATH GHODAKE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HIS Lordship after dealing with the merits of the case proceeded]. That takes us to the question of proper sentence to' be imposed on the accused. The sentences for the offences under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code cannot in the circumstances be said to be either severe or improper. Nor did Shri Mistry make a grievance about them. Hence it is not necessary to reconsider them. However, since almost all the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel were directed against the ultimate penalty imposed on the accused for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for causing the death of Bhiwa, we gave our anxious consideration to the same. The learned Judge in support of the ultimate penalty has given his reasons. According to him, the accused along with Baban who were charged for the offence of murder of Gajendra and for mutilating Shiva, were absconding, at the relevant time. They were so absconding with the object of doing away with Shiva who was a material witness to the said incident. The object was also to kill or mutilate as many brothers of Shiva as possible. The learned Judge has also taken further into consideration the fact that the victims of the case viz. Balkrishna and Krishna Pawar were unarmed and Bhiwa came to be armed only when he managed to snatch the sword from Baban for the protection of his own life. There was no provocation from the side of the victims and the witnesses, and on the other hand Baban and the accused had come armed with deadly weapons in broad daylight with the avowed object of injuring Shiva and his brothers. They were reckless and unmindful of any consequence and showed scant regard for law and life. They had also adopted inhuman and brutal methods of dismembering and killing the victims. If Baban and Atmaram had not been disarmed and controlled, it would be anybody's guess as to how many more persons would have lost their lives and/or limbs. The whole conduct of the accused and Baban showed callousness and cruelty. According to the learned Judge further there was no room for morbid pity on account of the youth of the accused. He also felt that there was no redeeming feature in the case to show any leniency in the sentence.

(2.) WE have no doubt in our mind that the present case is an unusual one and requires an exemplary punishment. The unusual features of the case flow from the fact that these accused and the deceased Baban were required in a trial for the murder of Gajendra and for amputation of limbs of Shiva in an earlier incident between the same parties. The said offences were committed almost in broad -daylight and within the view of all and with the callousness and audacity which showed scant respect for law and life. After committing the said heinous crime, Baban and the two accused were absconding from September 9, 1979 till December 13, 1979 i.e. the day of the fateful incident in the present case. During this period instead of being repentant for what they had done, they were terrorising the brothers of the victims Gajendra and Shiva and also the prosecution witnesses for the said incident, the declared object of which was to destroy the prosecution evidence including Shiva and also to wipe out the other brothers of Shiva and Gajendra, It is with this object and no other, that they appeared on the scene at an opportune hour when the members of the armed constabulary were away and the unarmed witnesses were doing their work of guarding Shiva's life. When this un -armed gathering was in its unguarded moment, the three culprits came on the scene armed with lethal weapons - two swords with blades of 46 inches each and a battle axe. The time and the manner of attack shows that there was a good deal of cold -blooded planning and preparation beforehand. After descending on the scene, they commenced their attack all of a sudden with sword blows on a sleeping man and gave him near fatal blows on the leg, the right thigh, the left thigh and the fore -head. They then tried to rush at others equally ferociously. As stated earlier, were it not for some saving graces viz. the accidents such as that of Godse snatching the axe from the hands of Atmaram; Krishna Pawar and thereafter Godse holding Baban, and Bhiwa snatching away the sword from Baban, there would have been more injured and dead. Further, the fact that accused No. 2 ran away after he was disarmed does not lessen the gravity of his offence a whit because he had avowedly come for the purpose of causing fatal injuries to the victims and others and would have, true to what he had done in the past, also indulged in the same horrendous assaults in which indeed his other companions did indulge. We have also to bear in mind that the present offence of murder was committed by the accused while they were needed for the earlier offence of murder. Although technically they will not be covered by Section 303 of the Indian Penal Code for which offence death is the only penalty, the substantial nature of the offence is the same. Not only therefore there is no redeeming feature in the case but all the circumstances on record go to aggravate the nature of -the offence pointing out that a sentence of mere life imprisonment will not meet the ends of justice.

(3.) DEATH sentences do have their use when society in general requires protection, which protection cannot be afforded except by permanently removing the criminal from amidst it. Far from being counter -productive, death sentence in such cases restores the normal even flow of the social life by removing the temporary distortions, and eliminating the passing deformities and perversities. These cases are of blood -thirsty, irreclaimable, hardened criminals and murder maniacs. To spare such gentry from the gallows is to expose the society to an unknown number of murders of innocent lives. It is not to be humane but to be callous to allow such criminals to return to the society, for they are a certain and a constant menace to the society in general.